From: petersm@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Marguerite Petersen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Subject: Re: Shatner proposes idea for Star Trek VII
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:09:12 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

In article <1992Jul21.052639.521@r-node.gts.org> yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung) writes:
>
>In article <1992Jul19.084645.3664@leela.cs.orst.edu> petersm@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU
>(Marguerite Petersen) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul15.070216.5078@r-node.gts.org> yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yun
>g) writes:
>>>
>>>Just one guy's opinion: It is not just bad, it is not just boring. ST V
>>>is OFFENSIVE. The entire story was stupid and incoherent. Worst of all,
>>>it raised the biggest question of mankind (re:God> and drop it as if it
>>>wasn't there in the first place.
>>
>>And here is another's opinion.  I really *liked* ST V!  I did not think it
>>was boring, bad, or stupid!  Would you have preferred that ST V *answer*
>>the biggest question of mankind for you?

>If they have the right answer, YES!!! :^)

Ah, I see.  The movie didn't come up with *your* answer, therefore it was
the wrong one.

>Watch the movie again and you will see that neither Kirk, Spock or McCoy were
>actually *interested* in meeting(not searching) with god. ST V offered, nor
>did it even try, absolutely no new perspective to the big question.

Maybe not a new perspective but certainly done differently and well within
the context of the Star Trek Universe.

>> That would have been offensive
>>in my opinion.  What ST V did was make one think and question just what
>>we follow, (whatever it is) and remind us to not do it blindly.
>>Not a bad idea, IMHO.
>>
> 
>We will have to agree to disagree here. Personally, I don't know *anybody*,
>when facing the question of religion, do not "think and question" what
>they are following. I don't need a movie to point out something so balantly
>obvious.

Well there are some who do not question *anything*.   Besides just because
you considered the point to be blatantly obvious doesn't mean everyone does.

>>>Before ST V, my feeling for Shatner was absolutely neutral. Now I can
>>>see why people see him as an ego maniac. In short, ST V was nothing but
>>>an ego trip for Shatner.
>>
>>I certainly don't see ST V as an ego trip for Shatner.  I think he did a
>>good job.  I agree with Atsushi.  I believe this dislike of ST V is more
>>a reflection of dislike of William Shatner than anything wrong with the
>>movie.  I have to admit that I came out of the theater after seeing
>>ST V, very disturbed.  But not with the movie itself.  After some thought
>>I realized I was disturbed by what the movie was examining, not by the
>>movie.  In retrospect, ST V is a very good movie.  I don't expect
>>the movies to answer all my questions about the universe.  I do expect
>>to be entertained.  I was definitely entertained!
>>
>
>All I can say is I feel very differently. I remember I was looking forward
>to the release of ST V very eagerly during the summer of 89 but didn't get 
>the chance to see it in theater because I was in Hong Kong at the time. 
>When I come back from Hong Kong, literally everybody told me how ST V 
>bombs royally. With that in mind, I went out and rented the video and 
>thought I was fully prepare for ST V, no matter how bad it was. I was wrong.

I'm sorry you were disappointed but that's life.

>I don't know about other people, but I didn't dislike Shatner before
>ST V. Now I dislike him because of STV.
>
                   
You're certainly entitled to your opinion.   Mine is just the opposite.
I've always liked his work and still do.

>Amos Yung          | Macintosh Jr.: The power to crush the other kid.

Marg
aka Elvira