Why are people mad at plausibility/continuity issues in Terminator:Salvation but not in this new Star Trek picture?? I'm sure there were a hundred times in the latter film when you could have screamed, "That destroys the entire premise of the series!" or "This makes no sense!" or "They betrayed Star Trek!" (i.e. VULCAN DESTROYED?!?), but no one did for the most part. But this seems to be one of people's major gripes with T:S. Are people really bigger Terminator purists than Star Trek purists???
1. "Star Trek is more entertaining; better characters (spoilers)" In response to Reply # 0
I wasn't a fan of Star Trek (basically because there were so many plot holes) but it's MUCH better than Terminator Salvation. Terminator is barren of anything but action so you focus more on things like why Moon Bloodgood falls in love in two seconds. Why those two seconds override a lifetime of being blown to bits by machines. You don't keep wondering why they just don't kill Kyle Reese.
Star Trek's entire movie isn't a plan to lure John Connor into the worst trap in film history. They lure him in and then... let him free people. They send in one Terminator at a time, none of them armed? Really, a naked Ahnuld was the key element to the plan?
Also, because Star Trek was a prequel, people could be surprised by things. John Connor was STUNNED by the human/machine hybrids and thought they were the worst things ever. I'd much rather have to face Marcus than the liquid metal shapeshifters that Connor had face twice already. (For that moral dilemma to work, there needed to be more of a "What is human?" debate but this film didn't have time for that.)
>They lure him in and then... >let him free people. They send in one Terminator at a time, >none of them armed? Really, a naked Ahnuld was the key element >to the plan?
(For >that moral dilemma to work, there needed to be more of a "What >is human?" debate but this film didn't have time for that.)
7. "RE: Star Trek is more entertaining; better characters (spoilers)" In response to Reply # 1
>I'd much rather have to face Marcus than the liquid >metal shapeshifters that Connor had face twice already.
I think he was a little more frightened due to the fact that THIS terminator (marcus) was sooooooooooo believable. emotions, facial expressions, a heartbeat.
Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86673 posts
Fri May-22-09 10:51 AM
2. "It's not continuity that doesn't make sense in T:S. On the contrary..." In response to Reply # 0
...it fits perfectly, really. It's the logic in the proceedings that often throw sense out the window, and the tone of the film is far more serious and grim than the other three are.
6. "RE: Terminator purism vs. Star Trek purism" In response to Reply # 0 Sat May-23-09 09:05 AM by ILL FLOW
people screaming that Star Trek is an alternate timeline but so is TSalvation
whenever you go back in time... the whole RIPPLE EFFECT. remember guys.
so technically every movie in Terminator altered the future. hell even the T-800 in T3 said that shit.
You didn't stop judgement day. you only postponed it.
So homie "theeraser" has a point. if we gonna give one movie with alternate timeline(s) a pass and praise it for everything and forget that it doesnt support the mythology.
8. "right. star trek was just as lame and disappointing, if not more so" In response to Reply # 0
but i guess with the hot young cast and a less dark feel, people found it easier to enjoy star trek. personally i rolled my eyes more often at star trek.
10. "Terminator Purism is infinitely more hilarious to me " In response to Reply # 0 Thu May-28-09 11:53 AM by buckshot defunct
But I think there are a couple of minor differences as to why a person may be more hung up about one than the other:
1. The whole Terminator mythos is about trying to prevent something from happening in the future. The time traveling is more integral to the story.
2. Star Trek was pretty explicit in explaining that this was an alternate timeline. It's been a while since I've watched a Terminator flick but I honestly don't remember them ever establishing alternate timelines. 2a. Because of #1, the concept of 'alternate timelines' kinda ruins whole Terminator concept altogether. If there's an infinite number of ways for things to play out for John Connor, doesn't that make me care even less than I already do? Saving *a* future isn't nearly as exciting as saving *the* future.
3. The Star Trek franchise has had longer to cool down. It was reboot time regardless. Deep down, even Star Trek fans knew it. It was time to let go.
And on a semi-related note, a plot hole and a coincidence are not the same thing. Star Trek had its share of both, but I take issue with criticisms of the latter. This movie took kind of a Star Warsy approach with things, and what some people saw as bullshit coincidences I perceived as being more about Kirk's destiny.
11. "As far as I know, only the tv series, The Sarah Conner Chronicles..." In response to Reply # 10
... deals with alternate time-lines/quantum theory/string theory. and it's kinda cool the way they do it. they should have had the tv show's creator/head writer do the new movie. he had some interesting ideas and could actually tell a story very well.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Pass The Popcorn
