<?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 on: Simon Pegg Reacts To The First &#8216;Star Trek Beyond&#8217; Trailer: &#8220;I Didn&#8217;t Love It&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://staging2.theplaylist.net/simon-pegg-reacts-to-the-first-star-trek-beyond-trailer-i-didnt-love-it-20151217/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://staging2.theplaylist.net/simon-pegg-reacts-to-the-first-star-trek-beyond-trailer-i-didnt-love-it-20151217/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Joseph Fisher		</title>
		<link>https://staging2.theplaylist.net/simon-pegg-reacts-to-the-first-star-trek-beyond-trailer-i-didnt-love-it-20151217/#comment-54608</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Fisher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indiewire.com/2015/more/uncategorized/simon-pegg-reacts-to-the-first-star-trek-beyond-trailer-i-didnt-love-it-97878/#comment-54608</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Star Trek Beyond looks like nothing but action packed blockbuster also. I\&#039;m seeing a recurring theme. It\&#039;s hard to distinguish a difference between Star Trek and any other film released nowadays. What happened to politics and grandiose ideas of a future where we all work together in hopes of a better universe. I see no sign of that in this new film from the official trailers. Barely even see connection among the charecters other than one little line from Bones about Spock. Which seems almost forced or implying charecter history when none exists amongst these new representations of at one time original charecters all unique and important to star trek fans. What I\&#039;m saying is you can\&#039;t play on charecter development from the original show or movies when you haven\&#039;t established the groundwork. JJ Abrams did an ok job with the first movie setting the tone that this is an alternate universe due to events unfolding differently than what was considered cannon. That is great, until you see Into Darkness which was just an effect overload to a classic sci-fi movie that embodied the best of what Star Trek had to offer in Wrath of Khan. Now with Star Trek Beyond they went to an even deeper low by turning it into an effect ridden movie devoid of any storyline or substance whatsoever. Keep the effects but don\&#039;t replace the idea of Star Trek. It\&#039;s not about special effects or explosions. It\&#039;s about an ideal of a united future. A great philosophy in a world covered in just the opposite. You\&#039;d think they would understand this could have been a great time to use Star Treks core idea to make a statement about current events and that there is a need for change. War is everywhere, racism is rampant. Why not make another statement like back in the 60s and 70s when it was unheard of to see a black woman and white man kiss or show affection. Star Trek broke grounds there and could have again. Instead we have another blockbuster film that might as well be in a galaxy far far away because I see no resemblance to home in these newer films at all.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Star Trek Beyond looks like nothing but action packed blockbuster also. I\&#8217;m seeing a recurring theme. It\&#8217;s hard to distinguish a difference between Star Trek and any other film released nowadays. What happened to politics and grandiose ideas of a future where we all work together in hopes of a better universe. I see no sign of that in this new film from the official trailers. Barely even see connection among the charecters other than one little line from Bones about Spock. Which seems almost forced or implying charecter history when none exists amongst these new representations of at one time original charecters all unique and important to star trek fans. What I\&#8217;m saying is you can\&#8217;t play on charecter development from the original show or movies when you haven\&#8217;t established the groundwork. JJ Abrams did an ok job with the first movie setting the tone that this is an alternate universe due to events unfolding differently than what was considered cannon. That is great, until you see Into Darkness which was just an effect overload to a classic sci-fi movie that embodied the best of what Star Trek had to offer in Wrath of Khan. Now with Star Trek Beyond they went to an even deeper low by turning it into an effect ridden movie devoid of any storyline or substance whatsoever. Keep the effects but don\&#8217;t replace the idea of Star Trek. It\&#8217;s not about special effects or explosions. It\&#8217;s about an ideal of a united future. A great philosophy in a world covered in just the opposite. You\&#8217;d think they would understand this could have been a great time to use Star Treks core idea to make a statement about current events and that there is a need for change. War is everywhere, racism is rampant. Why not make another statement like back in the 60s and 70s when it was unheard of to see a black woman and white man kiss or show affection. Star Trek broke grounds there and could have again. Instead we have another blockbuster film that might as well be in a galaxy far far away because I see no resemblance to home in these newer films at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
