The problem is: the film’s central storyline revolves around the character Nero’s anger over the destruction of his planet Romulus in the future, his return to the past (either to the same past that he then alters or to an alternate past–for the purposes of this question, it doesn’t matter which), and his revenge on the planet Vulcan and attempted revenge against Earth.

Why does the character waste his time (and the precious red “matter” that would have saved his planet, which he now has in his possession) blowing up Vulcan and attacking Earth? Why doesn’t he take the time and the red stuff and SAVE HIS PLANET! Since he’s now far in the past, his planet HASN’T BLOWN UP YET! IT’S STILL THERE. And HE NOW HAS THE MEANS TO SAVE IT. If he doesn’t know how to use the red “matter”, why doesn’t he enlist Spock’s assistance or the Federation scientists’ assistance, in saving Romulus.

At the very least, they could evacuate all of the people on the planet. After all, they’ve got years until disaster strikes (Ambassador Spock/Leonard Nimoy– was an old man when it happened. Now they’re in the past, when Spock/Zachary Quinto is, presumably, in his twenties. So they would seem to have a minimum of fifty years to save Romulus.

Anybody have a logical answer?

That is completely absurd. Secret Paramount/Bad Robot shills? Company line conspiracies? Now, Xai and I are surpressing naysayers with the imaginary “company line” in tow?

I have never called you or anyone else an apostate, canonista, contuinista, or any pejorative name. The only poster I have ever labeled as a “canonista” is me!

Also, I do not merely seek to “close off” all doubts or concerns. I just hope at times to assuage those which I find irrational.

In fact, I have had my own “doubts and concerns” over some of this creative teams’ decision-making. I’m not aware of any “company line” to tow.

I’m just curious…What is it about positive thoughts on the film that you find somehow less legitimate in a post than those expressing concern?

Am I 90% positive about the film? Sure.

But what’s your problem? Who is restricting your ability to express concerns about the film? It is certainly not me. It isn’t Xai either.

Put very simply—-if you do not wish your opinions to be subject to discussion or debate, then do not post them publicly!

Otherwise, discuss, debate, and have fun.

I will.

This thread is dead and off topic. We’re producing more heat than light now.

I’m signing off.

“Awesome! You actually tattled over a hypothetical suggestion (made in response to you calling another poster’s idea “silly”) made in the dying embers of a thread on page 2. Wow. ”

Glad you enjoyed, but I have better things to do. I suggested you ask Anthony. It was not me. How do I know it wasn’t you?
Regarding the effort you think Closet and I put forth to shut down dissent, I can only speak for myself and again…. no. And in my opinion, Closet does a great job of bringing up points regarding the subject and questioning the statements of others, but that’s lively debate, not an attempt to shut anyone down.
Two posters on this site could not possibly do what you accuse us of. We couldn’t even dent the flow if we wanted. And it seems like you have had plenty of opportunity to voice your opinion. If you want to complain, give Anthony a call…. or an email.

Awesome! You actually tattled over a hypothetical suggestion (made in response to you calling another poster’s idea “silly”) made in the dying embers of a thread on page 2. Wow.

At any rate, I don’t think I am crazy, because I have had other posters note that they have felt marginalized for voicing criticisms, concerns, and questions. It’s a plea for tolerance – not for trolls, but merely for dissent.

“We have plenty of posts that are “not toeing the company line” as you like to say. Who’s shutting them down?”

You and Closettrekker are giving it your best effort. I didn’t say that Anthony was running aroung recklessly with the ban hammer, but rather that fellow posters have been a little too quick to attempt to close off controversy, doubt, and concern. It would be nice to be able to voice an honest opinion without being labeled as an apostate or canonista, continuista, or whatever pejorative neologism springs to mind.

I don’t think in particular here is a likely plant – I just said that I would not die of shock if there were stealth marketing on this (or any other) website.
You did suggest yourself earlier as a suspicious character, so if I were being waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay, I guess I had have to give you up as a suspect. : )

“As for the rest of your theory of complicity between this site and the studio/production team you need to ask Anthony. I’m not privy to that, but I see no evidence to confirm it. If it were my site, I’d be p*ssed as hell at you for implying it.”

But I didn’t imply it – I simply gave you a “just so” story indicating how indirect influence is just as (if not more than) plausible as the theory of direct influence. You don’t have to put on a tin hat and worry that every other poster is a marketing rep, to plausibly suppose the existence of some variety of influence.

I have also speculated that the influence is also plausibly at “bottom-up” phenomenon, in which case it is the posters who are the primary source of agency/causality.

As for Anthony’s alleged outrage at these suggestions, you can always tattle, if the spirit moves you. Maybe I’ll catch a ban?

Are you saying that there is an effort to shut down other opinions?
We have plenty of posts that are “not toeing the company line” as you like to say. Who’s shutting them down? For example, I see Vorus in the posts above questioning several things, or Databrain… did someone put pressure on them or ban them? I cited what I’ve seen. I can’t speak beyond my experience

Bear in mind that comments are just a tiny fraction of the overall traffic of any website, this one included. Companies are far more interested in the articles than they are in the comments, here and elsewhere.