<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Stallion Cornell</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stallioncornell.com/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stallioncornell.com</link>
	<description>The Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 02:19:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by Bones</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17198</link>
		<dc:creator>Bones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 02:19:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not reading any of this until Friday after all the kids finals and I&#039;m not on call.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not reading any of this until Friday after all the kids finals and I&#8217;m not on call.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by Steve Dunlap</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17197</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Dunlap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 01:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, Stallion,
Some of the elements you mentioned are kind of what irked me a bit with this film.  I&#039;m not woefully bothered about it though, as it did not take away from my overall enjoyment of the film, but I do agree with several of your points.

Was Leonard Nimoy really...really necessary in this latest outing?  He was meant to pass on the torch, so to speak, in the previous film.  That&#039;s all well and good, and I appreciated his presence in that film.  In this one, it was kinda &quot;jump the shark&quot; for me.  Good to see him again in another Trek movie, but highly unnecessary.  Definitely going to the well one too many times...and that was just one case in a movie that tended to go to the well more than a desperate Fremen.

As for Quinto&#039;s Spock failing to control his emotions, well, I still look back on &quot;Where No Man Has Gone Before&quot; and even &quot;The Cage&quot; where we see Spock smiling a few times...even during the line &quot;Irritating...ah yes, one of your Earth emotions.&quot;  (I think it was &quot;irritating&quot;...might have been &quot;annoying&quot;....I&#039;m suffering from encephalo-gastronomic flatulence  right now, so forgive me if I misquoted. :D )

I found Quinto-Spock&#039;s scream of &quot;KHAAAAANNNNNN!!&quot; admirable, but as with the Nimoy revisit, highly unnecessary.

I thought Cumberbatch made a very menacing Khan, but I too was a bit thrown with his whole &quot;bad guy/good guy/bad guy again&quot; trip.   It wasn&#039;t his fault he was written that way...as with any good actor, they make the best of what they&#039;re told to perform, and he did it well.  I won&#039;t compare Cumberbatch to Montalban any more than I&#039;d compare Heath Ledger&#039;s &quot;Joker&quot; to Jack Nicholson&#039;s.   Both did their roles their way, and did them justice, in my very humble opinion.  (To be honest, Jack Nicholson&#039;s Joker had more in common with Caesar Romero&#039;s Joker, and Nicholson delivered the hilarity with great gusto.) 

Making the &quot;Space..the Final Frontier..&quot; speech a &quot;Captain&#039;s Oath&quot;?  Hmm...I suppose I could buy it, but, that was kinda like when Kevin Costner&#039;s &quot;Postman&quot; swore in Ford Lincoln Mercury as a &quot;deputy postmaster&quot;.  (I mean, I could see it now...do we &quot;swear in&quot; captains of StarFleet by making them recite the &quot;Captain&#039;s Oath&quot;?  :)

Long and short of it, this movie retreading on elements of Star Treks II and III kinda threw it for me a wee bit.  I even considered that some of this revisiting was ridiculous in the spirit of the word....not ha ha ridiculous, but ridiculous as in &quot;worthy of ridicule&quot;.

One thing I did like (and I say this because it seemed like a nice nod to all the Trekkies/Trekkers out there that could do nothing but bitch and moan about the reboot): Scotty&#039;s question to Kirk when he was ordered to sign for the &quot;advanced torpedoes&quot;.  &quot;Oh, are we &#039;military&#039; now?  Ah thought we were explorers!&quot;

Overall though, I still enjoyed this movie, and might even go back to see it a second time.  (The reboot I saw 5 times on the big screen).   This second outing, I saw in IMAX 3D, and the effects were WOW worthy.  I also heavily followed the story, but this time, should I go and see the movie again, I want to see it on just a regular screen...take away the WOW factor, and see if I still enjoy it as much as I did.

Dat&#039;s my personal take on it anyway.  Thanks for indulging it, Stallion.

Respectfully,
  Martok2112 (Steve)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Stallion,<br />
Some of the elements you mentioned are kind of what irked me a bit with this film.  I&#8217;m not woefully bothered about it though, as it did not take away from my overall enjoyment of the film, but I do agree with several of your points.</p>
<p>Was Leonard Nimoy really&#8230;really necessary in this latest outing?  He was meant to pass on the torch, so to speak, in the previous film.  That&#8217;s all well and good, and I appreciated his presence in that film.  In this one, it was kinda &#8220;jump the shark&#8221; for me.  Good to see him again in another Trek movie, but highly unnecessary.  Definitely going to the well one too many times&#8230;and that was just one case in a movie that tended to go to the well more than a desperate Fremen.</p>
<p>As for Quinto&#8217;s Spock failing to control his emotions, well, I still look back on &#8220;Where No Man Has Gone Before&#8221; and even &#8220;The Cage&#8221; where we see Spock smiling a few times&#8230;even during the line &#8220;Irritating&#8230;ah yes, one of your Earth emotions.&#8221;  (I think it was &#8220;irritating&#8221;&#8230;might have been &#8220;annoying&#8221;&#8230;.I&#8217;m suffering from encephalo-gastronomic flatulence  right now, so forgive me if I misquoted. <img src='http://stallioncornell.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' />  )</p>
<p>I found Quinto-Spock&#8217;s scream of &#8220;KHAAAAANNNNNN!!&#8221; admirable, but as with the Nimoy revisit, highly unnecessary.</p>
<p>I thought Cumberbatch made a very menacing Khan, but I too was a bit thrown with his whole &#8220;bad guy/good guy/bad guy again&#8221; trip.   It wasn&#8217;t his fault he was written that way&#8230;as with any good actor, they make the best of what they&#8217;re told to perform, and he did it well.  I won&#8217;t compare Cumberbatch to Montalban any more than I&#8217;d compare Heath Ledger&#8217;s &#8220;Joker&#8221; to Jack Nicholson&#8217;s.   Both did their roles their way, and did them justice, in my very humble opinion.  (To be honest, Jack Nicholson&#8217;s Joker had more in common with Caesar Romero&#8217;s Joker, and Nicholson delivered the hilarity with great gusto.) </p>
<p>Making the &#8220;Space..the Final Frontier..&#8221; speech a &#8220;Captain&#8217;s Oath&#8221;?  Hmm&#8230;I suppose I could buy it, but, that was kinda like when Kevin Costner&#8217;s &#8220;Postman&#8221; swore in Ford Lincoln Mercury as a &#8220;deputy postmaster&#8221;.  (I mean, I could see it now&#8230;do we &#8220;swear in&#8221; captains of StarFleet by making them recite the &#8220;Captain&#8217;s Oath&#8221;?  <img src='http://stallioncornell.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Long and short of it, this movie retreading on elements of Star Treks II and III kinda threw it for me a wee bit.  I even considered that some of this revisiting was ridiculous in the spirit of the word&#8230;.not ha ha ridiculous, but ridiculous as in &#8220;worthy of ridicule&#8221;.</p>
<p>One thing I did like (and I say this because it seemed like a nice nod to all the Trekkies/Trekkers out there that could do nothing but bitch and moan about the reboot): Scotty&#8217;s question to Kirk when he was ordered to sign for the &#8220;advanced torpedoes&#8221;.  &#8220;Oh, are we &#8216;military&#8217; now?  Ah thought we were explorers!&#8221;</p>
<p>Overall though, I still enjoyed this movie, and might even go back to see it a second time.  (The reboot I saw 5 times on the big screen).   This second outing, I saw in IMAX 3D, and the effects were WOW worthy.  I also heavily followed the story, but this time, should I go and see the movie again, I want to see it on just a regular screen&#8230;take away the WOW factor, and see if I still enjoy it as much as I did.</p>
<p>Dat&#8217;s my personal take on it anyway.  Thanks for indulging it, Stallion.</p>
<p>Respectfully,<br />
  Martok2112 (Steve)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by stallioncornell</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17196</link>
		<dc:creator>stallioncornell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 00:55:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[6 is my second favorite after 2. For me, the ranking is 2, 6, First Contact, 4, 3, 1, Insurrection, Generations, Nemesis, 5. I don&#039;t rank these two new ones in the pecking order, as they&#039;re kind of their own beast. I&#039;d probably put the 2009 Trek right after 6, and this one after 3.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>6 is my second favorite after 2. For me, the ranking is 2, 6, First Contact, 4, 3, 1, Insurrection, Generations, Nemesis, 5. I don&#8217;t rank these two new ones in the pecking order, as they&#8217;re kind of their own beast. I&#8217;d probably put the 2009 Trek right after 6, and this one after 3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by Brian</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17195</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 00:50:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Meh.  6 I think definitely not.  You could argue first contact.

Cumberbatch did a great job making the character his own.  

The &quot;help&quot; I&#039;m referring to is with starting a war.  Since Khan wants Starfleet decimated, he doesn&#039;t mind that this assists Marcus&#039; plan.  I admit, the Kronos thing bugged me though, quite a bit.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meh.  6 I think definitely not.  You could argue first contact.</p>
<p>Cumberbatch did a great job making the character his own.  </p>
<p>The &#8220;help&#8221; I&#8217;m referring to is with starting a war.  Since Khan wants Starfleet decimated, he doesn&#8217;t mind that this assists Marcus&#8217; plan.  I admit, the Kronos thing bugged me though, quite a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by stallioncornell</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17194</link>
		<dc:creator>stallioncornell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 23:01:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I submit the following:

1. 6 and First Contact were also better than this. 
2. The 12-34 crop are getting a watered-down version of a great scene.
3. As Khan, Ricardo Montelban&#039;s hemorrhoids&gt;Benedict Cumberbatch. Montelban IS Khan. Cumberbatch is a great actor but woefully miscast here. He would make a terrific evil Jean-Luc Picard.
4. Khan &quot;doesn&#039;t mind&quot; helping Marcus? That still makes no sense to me. 

5. Agreed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I submit the following:</p>
<p>1. 6 and First Contact were also better than this.<br />
2. The 12-34 crop are getting a watered-down version of a great scene.<br />
3. As Khan, Ricardo Montelban&#8217;s hemorrhoids>Benedict Cumberbatch. Montelban IS Khan. Cumberbatch is a great actor but woefully miscast here. He would make a terrific evil Jean-Luc Picard.<br />
4. Khan &#8220;doesn&#8217;t mind&#8221; helping Marcus? That still makes no sense to me. </p>
<p>5. Agreed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by Brian</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17193</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 22:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I submit the following:

1.  This film is more enjoyable than every other Star Trek movie except perhaps 2 and 4, and the reboot.  That&#039;s pretty fun.
2.  The 12-34 crop are experiencing this newly, unless like me, they saw the originals.  I appreciated the parrallelism, in spite of the plot holes.
3. Benedict Cumberbatch &gt; Ricardo Montelban.
4. Khan doesn&#039;t mind playing directly into Marcus&#039; hands.  He&#039;s out for revenge against Starfleet and Marcus, and doesn&#039;t much mind if that leads to the war Marcus wants anyway by hiding on Kronos.
And finally, 5.  If JJ Abrams does as much to revive Star Wars as he has Trek, I will be forever grateful.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I submit the following:</p>
<p>1.  This film is more enjoyable than every other Star Trek movie except perhaps 2 and 4, and the reboot.  That&#8217;s pretty fun.<br />
2.  The 12-34 crop are experiencing this newly, unless like me, they saw the originals.  I appreciated the parrallelism, in spite of the plot holes.<br />
3. Benedict Cumberbatch &gt; Ricardo Montelban.<br />
4. Khan doesn&#8217;t mind playing directly into Marcus&#8217; hands.  He&#8217;s out for revenge against Starfleet and Marcus, and doesn&#8217;t much mind if that leads to the war Marcus wants anyway by hiding on Kronos.<br />
And finally, 5.  If JJ Abrams does as much to revive Star Wars as he has Trek, I will be forever grateful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Retrek by Ed Renaud</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17192</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed Renaud</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 22:49:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2881#comment-17192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you, kind sir.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, kind sir.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defending Nu Trek by Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2302#comment-17191</link>
		<dc:creator>Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 22:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2302#comment-17191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] incarnation, thereby preemptively defending a movie I hadn&#8217;t seen. I had also wrote multiple posts outlining the reasons that Cumberbatch was going to be Gary Mitchell, not Kahn. Allow me to quote [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] incarnation, thereby preemptively defending a movie I hadn&#8217;t seen. I had also wrote multiple posts outlining the reasons that Cumberbatch was going to be Gary Mitchell, not Kahn. Allow me to quote [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on It&#8217;s Gary Mitchell by Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2293#comment-17190</link>
		<dc:creator>Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 21:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2293#comment-17190</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] new Trek incarnation, thereby preemptively defending a movie I hadn&#8217;t seen. I had also wrote multiple posts outlining the reasons that Cumberbatch was going to be Gary Mitchell, not Kahn. Allow me to [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] new Trek incarnation, thereby preemptively defending a movie I hadn&#8217;t seen. I had also wrote multiple posts outlining the reasons that Cumberbatch was going to be Gary Mitchell, not Kahn. Allow me to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Star Trek: The Stallionic Review by Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</title>
		<link>http://stallioncornell.com/?p=49#comment-17189</link>
		<dc:creator>Retrek &#124; Stallion Cornell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 21:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stallioncornell.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/star-trek-the-stallionic-review#comment-17189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] a hard question to answer. Yes, I&#8217;m something of a Trek purist, but I thoroughly enjoyed the 2009 reboot, although My Esteemed Colleague, the purest of purists, did not. (More on him later.) I even wrote [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a hard question to answer. Yes, I&#8217;m something of a Trek purist, but I thoroughly enjoyed the 2009 reboot, although My Esteemed Colleague, the purest of purists, did not. (More on him later.) I even wrote [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
