Comic: “Two sides to every argument”

March 11, 2009
Comic:  “Two sides to every argument”

About this comic

picture-161

This comic pretty much sums up what I have seen from lots of people. Though I am sort of the second guy, cept super excited about the movie, but you get the point.

27 Responses to Comic: “Two sides to every argument”

  1. Darrell says:

    I’m panel 2. You hit the nail on the head with this one! Awesomesausage!!

    • Gatiithaw says:

      Running Skype on a netbook can’t be an easy task and i do feel sorry for your slow concinteon speed, having a 55Mb down/15Mb upload has it’s advantages Any enjoyable episode again and some good choices from Tom, like Paul i’m jealous that he has new Trek to watch! +3Was this answer helpful?

  2. T-Roland says:

    Haha, love it.

  3. Damiri says:

    Are both of these guys going to be talking during the movie? lol

  4. Nice one, and so true! Some people take it (and other shows) way too seriously, and you can tell the actors and Roddenberry himself simply had fun doing what they were doing. When you get down to it, it’s just entertainment at the core, and it’s best not to take it more seriously than the people who created it. As long as there is a reasonable amount of consistency, I won’t go off the deep end.
    .
    From what I’ve seen so far, I think the new movie will kick ass in a Casino Royale/Batman Begins sort of way. I didn’t pay attention to the original show until the first movie came out, so I guess I’m somewhere between the extremes. I appreciate the New Voyages effort, so I don’t think I’ll have a problem with yet another actor playing Kirk.
    .
    Now, if it had M’Ress, it would rule completely. :-Þ

  5. Icesnake says:

    I’m going to see the movie (that makes 2 this year – I *HATE* theaters, kids in theaters, and theater prices). Anyone who’s so invested in some entertainment he saw when he was too young to be entitled to an opinion that he thinks a remake will “rape his childhood” obviously still hasn’t reached adulthood emotionally, and still should not be entitled to an opinion. On the other hand, there have been some really bad originals *and* remakes, and childhood doesn’t enter into it; bad movies are bad movies, period.

  6. Matt Certa says:

    love it. I try to be a balanced guy about such remakes. Im gonna see this either way, but that GI Joe movie has me a bit leary, just from the standpoint it looks like the cohesion of The Matrix and Transformers movies combined.

  7. DoggySpew says:

    Not to be a offtopic spoil-fert, but when is the next ELR due ?

  8. John S. says:

    Love this cartoon!
    I always loved Star Trek and cannot wait to see this movie!!!
    My child hood is just fine.
    I see this as kind of the BSG treatment.
    A third choice!!!

    • Smart says:

      I have a few, Anna Torv, Mariska Hargitay ( from Law and Order: SVU), Dennis Haysbert (black president from 24), Michelle Forbes, Amanda Tapping, Richard Dean Anderson, William Petersen, David Caruso, and Ben Browder. +1Was this ansewr helpful?

  9. Lenon says:

    I’m not a Star Trek Fan so I don’t get the last panel, can somone help a brotha out?

  10. dethmunky says:

    i’m guy 1 all the way.

  11. Eric says:

    I’m a Star Trek fan, but no. This movie’s not going to destroy my childhood. If I don’t like the movie in terms of “classic” Star Trek, then I’ll see it in the same light as the new BSG: A new beginning of a series based off a former series. I’ll probably like it whether or not it “agrees” with what I’ve thought as canonical Star Trek.
    As for the comic:
    I’m with G-Rod on this. :P

  12. PrincessIncognita says:

    Worst case scenario, we can just consider it to be another alternate universe of Star Trek – I mean, if Spock can have a goatee in the evil alternate universe then anything is possible :P

  13. Jason says:

    Yeah you nailed this one with the most popular opinions. I’m actually the first one and I pretty much said EXACTLY the same thing!

  14. prion says:

    the sad part is the type of movie this looks to be is the kind of treatment that Star Trek should have received years ago by continuing the story in the 24th century rather than going back into the past and making up a bunch of fake crap.

    I WANT more Trek

    But I want it to be part of the same continuity. I want to be able to stick the DVD’s in and watch them all in a row and pig out on junk food. Continuity has been established between the original series and the new stuff, how are we supposed to fit this new movie in?

    They divided the fan base before anybody even knew what this thing was about. But if the object is to make it look good to non-trekkies they could have done it by advancing the story in the 24th century with a new crew. If I want to know what happened to Kirk and Spock 100 years ago I would put the DVDs in. The old crew is dead. I want to know what’s happening in Cardassia now that the place has been blown to hell.

  15. mercator says:

    Summed it up perfectly. Some of these posts just reinforce the comic -_-

  16. Atlantis1982 says:

    @Lenon, Genn Roddenberry; the creator of ST, if you still don’t get the third panel.

  17. Rico says:

    If a two hour movie can so easily spoil your memories of something you claim to love so much, maybe you might want to rethink things. The movie is going to be fine and is so far removed from the show from 40 years ago everyone should just take a breath and enjoy it. I can easily enjoy both, and so can you. ;)

  18. Ben says:

    When I first heard about the film, I firmly felt like panel two. Of course at that time, when rumours first started surface on the scummy pond we call the internet, everyone was sure the movie would be set solely at Starfleet Academy – you know a sort of Star-Trek-The-Next-Dawson’s-Creek-Generation-Original-Series type thing.

    After watching the trailer, that little bastard inside of me that screams about canon and hating everything WB calmed down. After reading part of the synopsis of how this Trek ties with old Trek, my inner critic was elated. After watching the more recently released trailers, I’m thinking, “This movie just looks so darn cool – and the fact that I think they are connecting it in to canon in a clever way makes me even more excited!”

    After the expected disappointment that was Watchmen, I look forward to this movie with moist anticipation ( my palms get sweaty when I’m anticipating.)

    -Ben

  19. Zu says:

    The latest trailer is better and has calmed my nerves.

    I just hope they don’t make it “America! RA! RA! RA! FUCK YEAH!” like they did with enterprise. THAT is what ruins trek and makes Gene spin in his grave.

  20. Darrell says:

    Prion: I agree with you completely.
    .
    It’s not about “another actor playing Kirk”. It’s about a little kid playing someone defined as being 35 at the beginning.
    .
    The idea of just a new ship & not a prequel would have been better. It’s time to do something original… or at least somewhat so.

  21. Gene says:

    I guess no one likes different perspectives on a certain topic. That sentence can also be summed up as being called “The Fanboy’s Dilemma.”

  22. Moobie says:

    That is a fantastic characature of Gene Roddenberry! :-)

  23. Kyle Voltti says:

    I’m in the “I’m a Star Trek fan and I think this movie will be cool” camp

  24. DoggySpew says:

    I never was a purist. As time goes by, I realise that the old is not allways good. Nostalgia hits, when the good is remembered and the bad is forgotten, but then actually going back is not an option.

    For me, The Next Generation was when my Scifi fascination hit. Looking back, especially the first 2 seasons, TNG looked very crappy, but not in my memory. Looking at the original Series, I can’t help it that I really do not like the acting. But it was acting that on par of the same time. Acting has evolved. Even the Shia Labeaufs of today act better then most actors in the 60’s, in my opinion, or at least more appealing for this age.

    So Star Trek reinvented like this, I like.

Comments are closed.