SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Nov 20 2008 03:57 pm

I need to see more of Scottie.

Posted: Feb 04 2009 08:42 pm

Saw the trailer during the Super Bowl.

DO NOT WANT.

J. J. Abrams:Star Trek::Michael Bay:Transformers

Let's make it louder, sexier, and explodier. Yeah... how about no? Rolling Eyes

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

That commercial was so fast and condensed to fit the 30 seconds, I barely even noticed what happened.

Have you seen the full, theatrical trailer, Syd? That would give you a better indication of what it's like:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/startrek_trailer2_large.html

There is definitely danger in what you spoke of happening, but I like other stuff that I see in the trailer and read about, so it could go either way. I'm definitely going to see it, and then judge it then.

Posted: Feb 04 2009 09:33 pm

I like Trek too much not to actually see it, but at the same time I may love Trek too much to enjoy a reimagining.

Posted: Feb 05 2009 12:45 am

According to inside reports, JJ and company are covering thier asses with the hardcore fans. Apparently, it's a time travel story where someone goes back to try to fuck things up. Hence, why old Spock is in it. So, supposedly what you see is an "alternate timeline", so if it sucks, and everyone hates it, they can say, "Don't worry, it's not cannon."

Posted: Feb 05 2009 01:49 am

I just watched the trailer and my first thought was; this is a Star Trek movie?

Posted: Feb 05 2009 04:58 am

Knyte wrote:

So, supposedly what you see is an "alternate timeline", so if it sucks, and everyone hates it, they can say, "Don't worry, it's not cannon."

They're making an official theatrical Star Trek movie, not a fan film, so of course it's going to be canon. They don't have any illusions about that either: Roberto Orci gave a long interview to specifically address the question of how the new timeline the movie creates fits with Trek canon.

Posted: Feb 05 2009 09:34 am

I'm still wondering if there are that many people really interested in the origins of the original cast to even warrant this film being made at all. Do people really care when Kirk met Spock?

I guess I just don't understand the allure of TOS.

Posted: Feb 05 2009 09:38 am

All I have to say is that Enterprise was probably the biggest POS that Star Trek ever had throughout the history of Star Trek, so this can only go up from there.

Had this movie came out a year or two ago, everyone would have been goo goo ga ga about it because we didn't quite have the J.J. Abrams movie formula figured out. Now we do, and some people don't want his hands all over Star Trek.

I for one am happy to see another incarnation. It will rake in a great deal of money in the first four weeks and probably end up being almost like Star Trek: The Motion Picture, where it raked in the bucks and didn't end up being that great of a film cinematic wise. I just hope the movie doesn't treat itself like its so epic like that did.

If there isn't a sequel to it, there isn't a sequel to it. I also don't think that main stream television doesn't have or want the room for another Star Trek show, frankly. Which is sad.

Posted: Feb 05 2009 03:22 pm

I, and quite a few, hardcore fans want a series to continue on the current timeline. (ie TNG/DS9/Voyager. Post-Nemesis)

I mean, when you have 524+ hours of shows and movies that cover everything from the birth of the Federation (early 2200s) to current. (Nemesis took place in 2379) do you need to back to the beginning? I want either a show to carry on the timeline, or maybe one that explores the "missing years", which is the Enterprise B and C eras.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

I sort of agree with you Knyte, but under Berman we really over-saturated that time period to the point of exhaustion. It would really take a talented set of writers to find fresh stories in that era.

Going back to the time of the formation of the federation was definitely a bad idea in retrospect, but there is something about revisiting the origins of the Trek franchise and what made it so great in the first place - outstanding character interaction. TOS was the best not because it had a bunch of great sci-fi stories (1/3 of the episodes definitely did), but because the characters were real, interesting, and interacted in entertaining ways.

If the movie is bad, I think I will say to myself that it never happened, because it's a time travel story fudging with the origins of the show's timeline.

Posted: Feb 05 2009 07:30 pm

I agree with both of you guys (though I don't agree that TOS was the best). I'd definitely like to see another great Trek series like TNG continue the timeline, but definitely agree that it should be done by someone other than Rick Berman who pretty much ruined the brand, let's be honest.

I hate that this movie went back to the beginning and feels like it'll be the final nail in the coffin for Trek, which is very depressing. Hopefully they'll let it stay dormant for another 20 years like they did after TOS, and we'll get another fresh entry from a fresh crew somewhere around 2025.

Posted: Feb 06 2009 05:46 am

Cattivo wrote:

It would really take a talented set of writers to find fresh stories in that era.

That's why I was hoping they would jump forward by a couple of hundred years before they announced to go back instead with Enterprise. I've always been curious about the Federation of the 29th century, ever since they gave us a glimpse of that era with the timeship Aeon in Voyager.

It probably wouldn't be such a good idea to go that far ahead and base a whole show around a timeship, which would basically make it the Star Trek equivalent of Doctor Who. Plus the whole Temporal Cold War thing didn't exactly leave many fans hungering for more time travel. But I still think that a post-Nemesis show, set maybe one or two centuries later, would have been preferable over Enterprise and what they are doing right now.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

One thing to keep in mind, and a main reason why I'm keeping hope alive for this project:

It has Leonard Nimoy's stamp of approval. As any Trek fan knows, Nimoy knows what this franchise is about and how it should conduct itself. He successfully directed a couple of its movies and most importantly, turned down a role in Generations because he knew the script was awful. Now, one could argue that was an ego thing because he would only be in the opening scene, and Shatner would be in the climax, but combined with his previous statements and actions within this franchise, I tend to believe that he knows what make good and bad trek adventures.

Posted: Feb 06 2009 12:42 pm

Cattivo wrote:

One thing to keep in mind, and a main reason why I'm keeping hope alive for this project:

It has Leonard Nimoy's stamp of approval. As any Trek fan knows, Nimoy knows what this franchise is about and how it should conduct itself. He successfully directed a couple of its movies and most importantly, turned down a role in Generations because he knew the script was awful. Now, one could argue that was an ego thing because he would only be in the opening scene, and Shatner would be in the climax, but combined with his previous statements and actions within this franchise, I tend to believe that he knows what make good and bad trek adventures.

I've kept this in mind also, but like Syd said as well, I just have to see it regardless, although my hopes are relatively high still.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Latest trailer, fucking incredible:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/startrek_trailer3_large.html

Posted: Mar 06 2009 07:19 pm

The newest trailer doesn't do anything for the trekker in me, but just as a sci-fi fan, I agree. That's look fucking incredible.

Posted: Mar 07 2009 09:21 am

The villain = Shinzon 2.

Posted: Apr 27 2009 09:16 pm

I still have yet to be wowed by Star Trek trailers. Is everyone else seeing completely different trailers? Cuz all I see is characters I love acting like morons and arrogant pricks.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Meh, must be different sci-fi tastes. I've been loving the shit out of the trailers, and am ready to cream my pants opening weekend.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Syd Lexia wrote:

I still have yet to be wowed by Star Trek trailers. Is everyone else seeing completely different trailers? Cuz all I see is characters I love acting like morons and arrogant pricks.

Sounds like Star Trek to me.

Posted: Apr 28 2009 09:18 am

Oh snap!

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

First Jesus, now Kirk & Spock. Stop making fun of my pantheon of Gods GP!!!

If you don't like Trek, then stay out of the thread GP.

Posted: Apr 28 2009 01:14 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

I still have yet to be wowed by Star Trek trailers. Is everyone else seeing completely different trailers? Cuz all I see is characters I love acting like morons and arrogant pricks.

I know.

I'll admit I'm a bigger fan of TNG and Enterprise than I am of the OS, but I DO love the OS, and these previews...well, let me put it this way. For the first forty seconds, I assumed it was a preview for a new superhero/Die Hard movie, I kid you not. Then at the end it said 'Star Trek' and I said, "wtf??" How is Kirk (or whoever it was; I really couldn't tell) hanging off the side of an exploding spaceship Star Trek?? In TNG maybe, MAYBE you could get away with an over the top action sequence like that (MAYBE), but the original series? Really guys? The whole point and charm of it was how low key and low tech it was.

Not that I expect them to use the same effects from back then just for the sake of authenticity of course, but could they maybe not go against the ENTIRE spirit of the series? Please?

*sigh* All that said, I'm an incurable optimist, so I'll still go see it. Probably not on opening day (that's my way of protesting--I know Rolling Eyes

), but I can't not see a new Star Trek movie, even if it promises to destroy everything I love. Sad

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Don't be so melodramatic Hawk. Razz

It really isn't against the spirit of TOS. Action-adventure was key to the show, besides insightful sci-fi plots that made you think. Kirk was fighting aliens with his shirt off every other ep. How is this any different besides putting that into a 21st production context?