UnScripts talk:Star Trek (film, 2009 reboot)

A work of genius, my friend.... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

It would've been better if Guy Who Doesn't Act Like Scotty at All had been in the movie earlier, so that he could've been on this page that entirely ignores the last act. Guy Who Doesn't Act Like Scotty at All is awesome, even if his character only resembles the original character in accent. They should've made the movie about him. (On a side note, I think in an earlier version of the script he did appear earlier. This explains the terribly out-of-character scene where Guy with Terrible Accent is an expert in transporters for some reason). Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:14, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

KHANNNNNNNN!!!!! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

My point exactly. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:29, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

He didn't even resemble him in accent, not really. --Black Flamingo 14:39, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

He's still the best part of the movie. Except for the last part. It kind of dragged once they barricaded inside the Winchester. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 10:36, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Modusoperandi/UnScripts: Star Trek (film, 2009 reboot)

Pup 02:31 08 Feb '11

Stop reverting me!

I find this article a bit difficult to read for quite a few reasons, such as-

1. You not inserting a simple "a" or "the" before terms like "Plot Contrivance".
2. Needlessly lengthy character descriptions. Why does Captain Kirk have to call his wife Captain Kirk's Pregnant Wife Who is Also Pregnant And in Labour? It unnecessarily stretches out the dialogue, and doesn't sound right as a script.

I tried making some changes to make it more suitable for featuring, but User:Mordillo has reverted my edits, claiming that I may be removing elements important to the plot, and that you spelling errors may be intentional. Please understand, if you want your article to be featured, it has to be considered readable by people not familiar with your writing style. People like me. --Scofield 15:50, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

1. I changed that to your way. I like it better before, for reasons I can't explain, but it reads better now.
2. Before characters get their name, their name is what they are-slash-a description of them, so Kirk starts out as "Captain Kirk's Father's Pregnant Wife Who is Also in Labor's Son", to "Son of Captain Kirk's Father", "Young Jack Nicholson", etc. Plus, Kirk's mom bothered me. Seriously, she's got two lines and is only there in a transparent attempt to pull at your heartstrings (Kirk's mom is on board a ship. And that ship is in danger. And she's pregnant. And she's in labour. In the Director's Cut she's also blind and has a speech impediment) in what is the quintessential throwaway character. Her bit in the movie is so unmemorable (except in broad strokes) that, even after having seen the movie several times, I still had to go to IMDB to find out her character's name (and I just went to IMDB again to find Kirk's father's name). Her role could have consisted entirely of being a faded SpacePicture that Kirk kept in his pocket and it would have made no difference. The only reason her name doesn't entirely follow the format (like the other characters, where they're named, a new name appears, and the old name gets crossed out) is because it would've been eight miles long, instead of the more amusing three miles.

And bits like "Arbitrary Amount of Time" are supposed to be that and not "an Arbitrary Amount of Time" because it's a unit of measurement, like "I'll be back in fifteen minutes" instead of "I'll be back in a fifteen minutes", and "Mining Ship from an Alien Culture from the Future" is that without a "The" in front of it because it's like "Earth". Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:31, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Eeeh? It was just fine the way it was; definitely readable, and... yeah. 1234 ~ 21:34, 13 February 2011

The initial description of the lounge bar in Mining Ship from an Alien Culture From the Future is still a bit confusing, I'm afraid. What exactly do you mean by "less the thumping music and the broad with riding crop sitting in the corner?". I'd also suggest you add a character's list, so as to give new readers an idea of how you'll be naming the film's characters so that they aren't confused. --Scofield 12:41, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't that spoil the moment when you discover the characters' names? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 12:46, 14 February 2011

A wee bit of confusion, for those so-minded, goes a long way in moving the plot to its rightful role as satire. Maybe time to leave the page be now. Aleister 12:47 14-2-'11

If it weren't for the confusion this wouldn't be half as funny. Pup 12:49 14 Feb '11

My gripe about the lounge bar description remains. Somebody better fix it or I'll do it myself! Also, "a few years", "a couple months" are all Arbitrary Amounts of Time, and they all have an "a" before them. I'll leave the Character's List alone, though. --Scofield 12:55, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Don't. There are now four people on here who have asked you nicely to leave alone as they like the way it is. Even though you have every right to edit it, you'd be doing so against the express desires of the majority, including the initial author. Maybe you should step away - especially as you're likely to be reverted almost immediately. Oh, and you have expressed your dissatisfaction - that's been read, registered, taken on board. If it's not put in place doesn't mean it's ignored, just that it wasn't of enough value to adopt. You write in a very different style - it doesn't make the style this is in wrong. Pup 12:59 14 Feb '11

"Mining Ship from an Alien Culture from the Future" is like "USS Kelvin" (which can be "USS Kelvin" or "the USS Kelvin", but using the former for that lets me use the non-the version for the other one, which amuses me greatly and fits the style of the rest of the page). Until it gets a different name, that's its name (and it doesn't get a different name, both because I can't remember what it was and the long name is funnier). It's also a noun or something (nounverb? adnoun?), hence "There's Mining Ship from an Alien Culture from the Future coming through...", in the Dessert Trek continuum would be "There's pudding coming through...".

A character list would defeat the purpose of dragging the reader kicking and screaming along a bumpy trail of the obvious.

"less the thumping music..." is the prepositional form of "less". Don't you kids ain't not never learned english in school rightly anymore? And damn you for making me use a phrase like "prepositional form". You monster!

Three years as a description of how much time has passed is not an arbitrary amount of time. An Arbitrary Amount of Time is precisely that, for Robau (rather than a proper if/then statement, as in "If they kill me, then shoot them" or "If I give you the secret signal, then start shooting", why did Robau want the crew to wait 15 minutes before they did anything, especially since they could see everything that happened to him as it was happening?) and Pike/Kirk (how would a drunk layabout douche get his own boat in eight years?). Ergo, Arbitrary Amount of Time (although, admittedly the first instance is more arbitrary than the second, since I assume that it's technically possible to work up the ranks that fast). Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 13:27, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

My hands have been washed with soap, a rarity, to teach them a lesson for making the unwanted change. I saw some of the Star Trek film yesterday where they go back into the past to kidnap the whales, and had forgotten how well written the movie series was. Has anyone heard if another sequel (prequel) is filming or is planned? Aleister 13:38 14-2-Be My Valentine

Star Trek IV: The One with the Whales was the last good Trek movie (although it's firmly stuck in the 80's. And it's yet another time travel episode). Of course "good" is a relative term. A good Trek movie isn't actually a good movie. Bladerunner is a good movie (the director's cut is a great movie). A good Trek movie, like a good Bond film (exempt Golden Eye and Casino Royal, a far better reboot than Trek, which both qualify as good movies rather than just good Bond movies) is watchably crappy (Timothy Dalton's ones, which admittedly suffer the same fault as Star Trek IV), rather than painfully crappy (Roger Moore's ones, particularly Moonraker). Hmmm...by that standard the Star Trek reboot is a good Star Trek movie (except for the "we did it this way so that we can ignore the entire Trek canon" part).

This one made a buttload of money so, yes, a sequel is in the works. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 14:11, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for the recommendation of the Bladerunner director's cut, haven't seen it. I'm more Mission Impossible than Bond, but liked the Pierce Brosnon ones, and have never even tried - thank the Egyptian Gods - one of Roger Moore's. If I haven't said it yet, which I haven't outside of implying, this is a great page and is quickly becoming a classic talk page. Aleister a few minutes later, and you are my valentine

Correction: it's the Blade Runner "The Final Cut", and the J.J. Abrams reboot of this talkpage is due to hit Uncyclopedia in 2013. It will get a ton of hits, but will leave old-school Uncyclopedians cold. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:45, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

The Undiscovered Country is a good one, and Timothy Dalton was the best Bond. Also, I believe the world is flat. --Black Flamingo 16:02, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

As an even numbered one, Star Trek VI fits the old rule of "the even numbered ones are the good ones". It's got Red Foreman in it. That's all I remember. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:44, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Don't you change a fucking thing, its perfect as it is.... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

To be fair, you're my own worst critic. It's hormonal, probably. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 10:36, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Do I get ostracised if I mention that I didn't like Blade Runner as a movie - book was far superior, and the best bond is Connery, followed by Craig. And First Contact is my preferred Trek trek, but none of these are a patch on Aliens! Pup 10:25 15 Feb '11

Both the movie and the book were good (and once they'd edited the movie to trust the audience, it got better). And 1rd Contact sucked. And Aliens is the best. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 10:36, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

1st Contact I like as it's really just an extended episode of the show. Borg Queen was an annoyance though - the idea of an elite in a collective that is so purist just rubs me the wrong way. Pup 11:14 15 Feb '11

You're right. I do write in a very different style. In fact, I still find the usage of "less" as a preposition rather weird. Can't we change it to without, or something....? Also, I'm just gonna add one word to a line I didn't understand until just now. "There's Mining Ship from An Alien Culture From the Future coming through the lightn...sorry....Plot Contrivance!" The.....confuses users like me to this day. --Scofield 11:21, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

"Less" or "without"? I don't care enough to argue. Neither is a funny word, like "nipple".

I think, and excuse me if I get this wrong (I'm sure that I will post here and correct myself if so), but the characters are getting used to the style of the page and the randomish nature of the plot at the same time the reader is. It goes from being a lightning storm to a black hole to a wormhole in no time at all, and for no reason. With two clicks of a mouse, a good editor would've had them starting off investigating a wormhole. It might be that, as with Guy with Terrible Accent and the transporter, it's a cobbling of versions of scripts. In any event, the movie is just leaving the gate by the time it stumbles. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:42, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Nice ending to the script, though. A Convenient Reason why Movie Villain does not bother to think of such a Rational Solution is because he's been Blinded By Revenge! --Scofield 11:51, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

And I repeat- I loved the film! Star Trek FTW! --Scofield 11:52, February 15, 2011 (UTC)