From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: epwise@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Abrams to destroy Star Wars franchise next
"Bast" wrote in
news:kei5jp$gru$1@dont-email.me:
>
>
> Wiseguy wrote:
>> "Bast" wrote in
>> news:kehem7$j46$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>> "Bast" wrote in
>>>> news:kegg7v$15c$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>>>> "Bast" wrote in
>>>>>> news:kedv8n$lbf$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Bast" wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:ke9h8t$u3f$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Bast" wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:ke72dv$gpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Wiseguy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:YourName-2801131235030001@203-118-187-
>>>> 26.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article , "Bast"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trek 2009 is not entertainment,....just a waste of about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 hours
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you include all the time and money spent making the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ill-fitting rubbish, then it's A LOT more than just two
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hours wasted. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately, because so many blind morons did go and see
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it (most because they're simply too stupid to do anything
>>>>>>>>>>>>> else on a Friday / Saturday night), they're making more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> movies in this new butchered, so-called "Star Trek" series
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and real Star Trek is dead. :-(
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How is anyone a moron because they went to see a movie?
>>>>>>>>>>>> No matter if they thought it was good or bad, how would
>>>>>>>>>>>> they know before they saw it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps posts on usenet from others who HAVE SEEN IT, might
>>>>>>>>>>> give them an indication of what to expect.
>>>>>>>>>>> And if they should pass.
>>>>>>>>>>> ....Like No name and myself have posted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And of course, your opinion would match their opinion
>>>>>>>>>> automatically and there's no use for them to see it.
>>>>>>>>>> Or they could go and make up their own mind.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In case you missed my reviews of Trek 2009, the movie has no
>>>>>>>>>>> storyline, and is an unconnected overly done CGI mish mosh
>>>>>>>>>>> with lots of loud noises to help you forget there is no
>>>>>>>>>>> storyline to follow, and almost completely changed the
>>>>>>>>>>> characters from those we knew in TOS,....for the worse. But
>>>>>>>>>>> probably great to watch if you have A.D.D., and things like
>>>>>>>>>>> continuity confuse you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I never said otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or do you really expect everyone to drop everything, listen
>>>>>>>>>>>> to your childish comments and believe it sight unseen?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You really are an idiot.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But have YOU posted your opinions of it ?
>>>>>>>>>>> Other than you haven't seen it yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How can I have an opinion if I haven't seen it? Other than
>>>>>>>>>> it sounds stupid, which I have stated.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Basing an opinon that it must be good because it made a lot
>>>>>>>>>>> of money from suckers,....must mean every "AS SEEN ON TV"
>>>>>>>>>>> item in stores is great value. But Nope,....most of that is
>>>>>>>>>>> junk too.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I never said it was good because it made money or any other
>>>>>>>>>> reason.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My point was that why should anyone blindly listen to usenet
>>>>>>>>>> reviews when they are presumed to be Star Trek fans and would
>>>>>>>>>> want to see it for themselves.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No reason at all that they can't.
>>>>>>>>> Plenty of sources to download a copy for free, and if it
>>>>>>>>> appeals to you, you go to the theater.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why waste money to see something you've already seen? Just go
>>>>>>>> to the damn theatre and make up your mind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did you not notice I said I downloaded a copy a few days after
>>>>>>> it hit theaters ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was responding to your statement:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Plenty of sources to download a copy for free, and if it appeals
>>>>>> to you, you go to the theater."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can't you keep track of what you post?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes I can keep track.
>>>>> But your response " Why waste money to see something you've
>>>>> already seen? Just go to the
>>>>> damn theatre and make up your mind. "
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems to imply I'm paying TWICE,....when in truth, I didn't pay
>>>>> once. At least not before I have a pretty good idea the ticket
>>>>> price at a theater would be worth it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Uh, no. Just because you've seen it doesn't mean you've paid for
>>>> it, as you have just said. Why are you INFERRING something that
>>>> contadicts what you've already stated?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Stated ?
>>>
>>> I said I refused to pay to see it at a theater, just to be
>>> disappointed, and poorer of wallet.
>>>
>>> You stated I should just go to the theater in the first place.
>>> ....Are you going to pay for the ticket, and transportation, and a
>>> snack ?
>>>
>>> I won't.
>>> Not when I do not have to, and can still watch it at home for free
>>> to have a valid opinion, that I did not like it at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> How many times do I have to repeat what you said?
>>
>>>>>> "Plenty of sources to download a copy for free, and if it appeals
>>>>>> to you, you go to the theater."
>>
>> And I replied:
>>
>>>>>>>> Why waste money to see something you've already seen? Just go
>>>>>>>> to the damn theatre and make up your mind.
>>
>> If you're going to download it you might as well just go to the
>> theatre and see it rather than download and then PAY to go see it.
>>
>> Understand now, or do I have to use smaller words?
>
>
> No smartass.
> But you miss the whole point of the difference of a movie theater
> experience, and watching something less than perfect on a computer
> monitor.
>
> I like going to the theater occasionally.
> But I do not like going to the theater to see a bad movie.
> And after watching the trek 2009 download, I realized it was a bad
> movie.
>
> It would be pretty pointless to get into ANY discussion over a movie I
> had never watched,...don'tcha think ?
>
>
>
Are you so dumb you can't read?
> But you miss the whole point of the difference of a movie theater
> experience, and watching something less than perfect on a computer
> monitor.
I'm the one who said go to the theatre and you're the one who said
download the movie.. You're contradicting and arguing with yourself,
dumbass.
> I like going to the theater occasionally.
> But I do not like going to the theater to see a bad movie.
> And after watching the trek 2009 download, I realized it was a bad
> movie.
>
Nobody cares what movies you like and go to. I wasn't talking about Star
Trek or movie trailers.
You said:
>>>>>> "Plenty of sources to download a copy for free, and if it appeals
>>>>>> to you, you go to the theater."
>>
Are you capable of understanding what you wrote? Apparently not, dumb
shit. And I pointed out how stupid you are by replying:
>>
>>>>>>>> Why waste money to see something you've already seen? Just go
>>>>>>>> to the damn theatre and make up your mind.
But you're so goddamned stupid you can't understand that or apparently
anything else.
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
* Origin: TeraNews.com (1:2320/105.97)
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux
* Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)
|
