logo Sign In

Abrams is Destroying Star Trek like Lucas has Destroyed Star Wars — Page 6

Author
Time
Gaffer Tape said:

lordjedi said:

He also cheated on the Kobashi Maru, changing the program so he could win because he "doesn't like to lose".  Supposedly that's shown in the new movie.

 

Kobayashi.  Sorry, just had to nitpick.  ^_~

Damn!  I even Googled that to make sure I had the correct spelling.  It's spelled wrong on at least two other sites.  I guess I should have checked Wikipedia.  And Google didn't even correct me.

 

F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
lordjedi said:

One of the things I liked most about Kirk, and to a lesser extent Picard, is that they were willing to break the rules in order to protect their crew.  That's something Janeway didn't seem willing to do and it was obvious from the start.  She had a chance to get everyone back home in the first episode of Voyager and turned it down.  I can't remember the exact reasons, but all I could think was "Your crew comes first!"  Obviously that would've ended the series, which is why they needed better writers from the start.

Maybe in the pilot Janeway follows the rules, but as time goes on I think she breaks the rules far more than any other Captain on any of the other shows, makes Kirk look like a boy scout. I think in one episode Tuvok reminds her that she has already broken the Prime Directive 47 times in that month alone. The show ends with her illegally going back in time and altering events to get the Voyager home safely.

 

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yes and instead of Getting court martialed she is Promoted to Fleet Admiral and Picard has to take orders from her.

I believe i read once that they were looking for a Female Kirk Type Chracter and that was Kathryn Janeway.

They were so far away from home she was supposed to be like the Person on the frontier making decisions.

Kind of Like Wagon Train to the Stars.   Rodenberry never denied that Star Trek was just a space western with Social Themes.

Both Kirk and Han Solo are space cowboys.

The original Actress picked to play Janeway not Mulgrew was less warm and witty or outgoing.  She was more cold and scientific, very much how the Picard character started out until they made him More Kirk Like.

The funny thing is i think of Mulgrew and i think of the character she played in the movie remo williams,lol.

I also laughed out loud that Tom Paris was played by the guy from Masters of the Universe.  "good Journey" 

 

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Where the hell do people get the idea James T. Kirk is a punk-ass rebel like JJ has him in this movie?

In episodes of TOS, We are told how a young James T. Kirk was.

In "Where no man has gone", Gary Mitchell who is a long time friend of kirk's says Kirk was a book-worm and basically a nerd. Then in "The Corbomite Maneuver", Bones talks about how Lt. Dave Bailey is like Kirk in his early years in Starfleet. Lt. Dave Bailey is nervous and inexperienced. Also in "Shore Leave", Finnegan is a bully who picked kirk in his academy days.   

Kirk likes to play chess with his best-friend Spock in which Kirk can out smart the vulcan.

James T. Kirk is a Nerd and more so in his early years then as a captain.

I hate to say it but James T. Kirk in his early years in Starfleet was more likely like Wesley Crusher.

Wesley Crusher would have more like became a Captain because of Captain Picard teaching on the USS Enterprise-D just like how James T. Kirk became a Captain because of Captain Garrovick teaching on USS Farragut.

Kirk cheated the Kobayashi Maru test by reprograming the computer so that it is possible to win which is more like Matthew Broderick's computer nerd character in War Games then James Dean as Jim Stark in Rebel Without a Cause.

These things about the young Kirk is more likely some of the reasons why Gene Roddenberry hated the idea of Star Trek: The First Adventure back in 1990. Star Trek: The First Adventure was going to be a Top Gun like Star Trek movie, in which Gene's Kirk character would have been rewritten into a young rambunctious (rebel) farmboy goes to Starfleet Academy.

Gene Roddenberry and the regular Star Trek actors (including Nimoy) hated this idea.


Just because James T. Kirk bends the rules sometimes does not mean he is a James Dean-type Rebel.

Newsflash: Everybody in Starfleet bends or brake the rules. Hell even the programed android Data has bend the rules.

James T. Kirk is not like James Dean or Han Solo or Luke Skywalker or Anakin Skywalker .

James Dean is James Dean, Han Solo is Han Solo, Luke Skywalker is Luke Skywalker and James T. Kirk is James T. Kirk. 

 

JJ Abrams and his writers are just dumb-asses who need to steal from other movies.

The Kirk in this movie is just a Anakin Skywalker/Mutt Williams copy (JJ Abrams and his writers have their heads high up in Lucas' butt).

I hope this movie fails.

I also hope Harve Bennett and David Loughery sues JJ Abrams and his writers for stealing their Star Trek: The First Adventure.

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Just because there is a picture of Lucas and JJ having a chat, and because ILM is doing the effect (as they do for countless other films) we now have all these crazy over the top conspiracy theories of how JJ worships Lucas and is asking for his advice on how to destroy this as Lucas destroyed Star Wars.

If this movie bombs, it is by no fault or success of Lucas'. It is being made by a TV show creator who is successful at bringing together casts of great looking young actors to pull in audiences. His last movie was an unwatchable take on the giant monster movie genre, it while it was successful in creating hype, and getting people interested in the looks of the cast, it pulled plenty of people into the theaters, but how many people came out saying that it was an awesome movie? Not that many from what I can tell. I have yet to hear one of my friends say that they really liked it, the best I have heard was, "It was kind of cool I guess, wouldn't really be interested in seeing it again though". I have a feeling this new ST flick will be kind of like that. Why do we feel the need to blame Lucas for this? I can already imagine the next series of rants, "Lucas raped my childhood by destroying Stars Wars, Indiana Jones, and now Star Trek!" Grrr, I give you the first two, but please don't stretch this Lucas hatred to expand to every single cinematic disappointment you experience from now till the day you die.

The interesting paradox of this whole thing, is that JJ is aiming this sucker at the "Star Trek, eww, nerd alert!" crowd, and not at the nerds who are its loyal base. Kind of an interesting experiment actually. I think for the next phase of this experiment, they should take Barbie, a franchise aimed at the 9 years and under girl crowd, and make it into a feature film aimed at 18 - 34 year old males.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

JJ is either a genius for throwing out 40 plus years of trek and Starting over or a moron.

Canon in such big fictional Franchises needs to be able to expand and contract.  A lot has been added to the canon throughout the years.  Similar to Star Wars it is almost impossible to make everything match up without Contradictions and so forth.  In Lucas case he very wisely set the EU apart from the films to avoid having constant retcons.  Yet he went ahead and did worse to the canon than the EU ever did with the prequels and Special Editions continued to be tinkered with to fit his current vision of his created universe.

The prequels and their canon was so vastly different from the Original Trilogy i sometimes wonder why he did not make them to Match the original films or completely Remake the old Trilogy.  At least in that scenario the originals would be untouched and would not have to be buried.

 

Kirk as a rebel was started by Nicholas Meyer and Harve Benett.  Star Trek II revamped the series and injected Shakespeare drama and classic literature, as well as militarism that was not a part of Roddenberry original design at least according to him.

I personally don't think Star Trek was always that way.  His philosophical outlook changed during the Movie years and during the Next Generation.  His vision of the future could no longer have conflict.  Everyone worked together, and there was no disease, hunger or money.  Star Trek did originally have social issues Talked about in the guise of science fiction and a quasi hippie idealism to it in the begiinning.  But it also had conflict and Was basically a space western.

There was sex and violence at least what was allowed in those times in the rejected "too cerebral pilot"   The Cage.

Roddenberry like Lucas after him took way more credit than was his due by Appropriating the work of his employees and claiming it as his own.   A great deal Of Star Trek was Dorothy (D.C.) Fontana and Gene Coon. Also Samuel Peoples.  Nimoy himself pretty much created the character of Spock with Little to go on from Gene's rough idea. Just like the Kirk character was Created and interpreted by William Shatner in a way that made the character live and breathe.  Actors are a large portion of the creation and they almost never get the recognition they deserve especially in science fiction.

Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford should be applauded for breathing Life into the characters in the original star wars trilogy.  Had the characters been played by Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman etc.  they would have been as sterile as the prequels and its phony cgi are.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
C3PX said:

His last movie was an unwatchable take on the giant monster movie genre, it while it was successful in creating hype, and getting people interested in the looks of the cast, it pulled plenty of people into the theaters, but how many people came out saying that it was an awesome movie? Not that many from what I can tell. I have yet to hear one of my friends say that they really liked it, the best I have heard was, "It was kind of cool I guess, wouldn't really be interested in seeing it again though".

Really?!  I loved Cloverfield.  I normally hate movies that end that way, but I loved Cloverfield.  I was on the edge of my seat (literally) at times.  I'd watch it and rewatch it looking for all the little clues about the monster and events that are sprinkled throughout the movie (one of the opening songs even aludes to one of the first deaths).

The interesting paradox of this whole thing, is that JJ is aiming this sucker at the "Star Trek, eww, nerd alert!" crowd, and not at the nerds who are its loyal base. Kind of an interesting experiment actually. I think for the next phase of this experiment, they should take Barbie, a franchise aimed at the 9 years and under girl crowd, and make it into a feature film aimed at 18 - 34 year old males.

It could be Bat Barbie :)

skyjedi2005 said:

Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford should be applauded for breathing Life into the characters in the original star wars trilogy.  Had the characters been played by Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman etc.  they would have been as sterile as the prequels and its phony cgi are.

This is doubtful.  In the originals, George couldn't keep saying "I don't care what you think".  He actually had people telling him no and he had to listen.  By the time we got to the Prequels, he didn't have to listen to anyone.  So while you're right on some level, Hayden probably wouldn't have been cast in the first place, therefore you wouldn't have seen the same performances.  The performances you saw are like that because Lucas figured he'd just fix everything in post.  That was not possible in the originals, so you therefore have different performances.

In the case of Star Trek, Paramount doesn't have to worry about what the creator thinks since they own the rights.  One of the other things I see wrong with this new movie is that everyone, to me, looks way to young.  The actors in TOS looked much older than the current actors.

 

F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
 (Edited)
C3PX said:

Just because there is a picture of Lucas and JJ having a chat, and because ILM is doing the effect (as they do for countless other films) we now have all these crazy over the top conspiracy theories of how JJ worships Lucas and is asking for his advice on how to destroy this as Lucas destroyed Star Wars.

If this movie bombs, it is by no fault or success of Lucas'. It is being made by a TV show creator who is successful at bringing together casts of great looking young actors to pull in audiences. His last movie was an unwatchable take on the giant monster movie genre, it while it was successful in creating hype, and getting people interested in the looks of the cast, it pulled plenty of people into the theaters, but how many people came out saying that it was an awesome movie? Not that many from what I can tell. I have yet to hear one of my friends say that they really liked it, the best I have heard was, "It was kind of cool I guess, wouldn't really be interested in seeing it again though". I have a feeling this new ST flick will be kind of like that. Why do we feel the need to blame Lucas for this? I can already imagine the next series of rants, "Lucas raped my childhood by destroying Stars Wars, Indiana Jones, and now Star Trek!" Grrr, I give you the first two, but please don't stretch this Lucas hatred to expand to every single cinematic disappointment you experience from now till the day you die.

 

I did NOT say Lucas is a blame for The New Star Trek.
I said "JJ Abrams and his writers have their heads high up in Lucas' butt" which is a fact. JJ Abrams is not a fan of Star Trek, but is a fan of Lucas.
you have JJ Abrams, his writers and Chris Pine saying Kirk is like Indiana Jones and Han Solo. You have JJ Abrams, his writers and Chris Pine saying that Pine played kirk like Harrison Ford. You have JJ Abrams and his writers all the time saying How they are adding Star Wars into this Star Trek Film and so on....
These are not conspiracy theories, but are the facts.

I do not blame Lucas for The New Star Trek. 
I blame Jeffrey Jacob Abrams and his crew for this the New Star Trek, period.
Lucas did not force his ways on JJ Abrams and his crew.
The only thing which Lucas and JJ Abrams are the same in them is they both seem to not listen to or care about the fans.

I see JJ Abrams as worst then Lucas.

Lucas Destroyed his own creations, but Abrams is Destroying other people's creations.

 

The interesting paradox of this whole thing, is that JJ is aiming this sucker at the "Star Trek, eww, nerd alert!" crowd, and not at the nerds who are its loyal base. Kind of an interesting experiment actually. I think for the next phase of this experiment, they should take Barbie, a franchise aimed at the 9 years and under girl crowd, and make it into a feature film aimed at 18 - 34 year old males.

Great and Funny Point.

Well the last thing JJ Abrams called his experiment was Cloverfield. I just hope people see this star trek movie as bad before they go see it, unlike Cloverfield. The sad thing is that some Star Trek fans will go see this S**** because they are full of fear that if they to do not, Star Trek will be no more. For me, if this type of movie is the future of star trek, then it is better to let it die. The thing is that Star Trek fans have to know that Star Trek is Forever and if this movie bombs, Star Trek itself will not.

Author
Time
Hunter6 said:

For me, if this type of movie is the future of star trek, then it is better to let it die. The thing is that Star Trek fans have to know that Star Trek is Forever and if this movie bombs, Star Trek itself will not.

Why do you even want future adventures in the Star Trek franchise? Wouldn't you rather keep it as it is?

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Nanner Split said:
Yoda Is Your Father said:

Ricky Gervais sucks. The Office was okay, so was Extras, but now he's just annoying. In England if you say 'Ricky Gervais' people groan. It will be this way in America before long too.

 

 

Fixed. :P

LOL! So true.

 

War does not make one great.

Author
Time

I HOPE THIS MOVIE IS TREMENDOUSLY SUCCESSFUL, AND THAT IT TURNS OUT TO BE A GREAT MOVIE.  WHY?  SO ALL OF YOU NAYSAYERS WILL SHUT THE FUCK UP.  THE MOVIE ISN'T EVEN OUT YET, IDIOTS.  YOU CAN COMPLAIN ALL YOU WANT ONCE YOU SEE THE MOVIE.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time

WHY?  SO ALL OF YOU NAYSAYERS WILL SHUT THE FUCK UP.

C'mon Dayv, that wont happen.

I hope it's good but i'm totally on the fence on this one. Are we the only ones willing to adopt a 'wait and see' attitude? I just hope they have an 'in universe' explanation for why the ship looks so different.

YOU CAN COMPLAIN ALL YOU WANT ONCE YOU SEE THE MOVIE.

Aww, Dayv! - that's like inviting a vampire into your home.

 

Author
Time

I still find it funny you come into a thread with a title that pretty much says, "hey let's complain about the new Trek film" and then complain about people complaining. The fact of the matter is, this film is simply screaming out, "Hate me, I am going to suck as hard as I possibly can." You can hope this film will be hugely successful and awesome all you like, but it isn't going to fix anything. The best you'll be able to do is lower your standards and pretend that it is good, seems to have worked well enough for SW fans over the last few years.

I have no doubt this will be a box office smash though, I'll be very surprised if it isn't.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)
PSYCHO_DAYV said: THE MOVIE ISN'T EVEN OUT YET, IDIOTS.  YOU CAN COMPLAIN ALL YOU WANT ONCE YOU SEE THE MOVIE.

 

This is the same type of bullshit that JJ and his Crew keeps saying too.

The thing is that people have to pay first and there are no refunds if you hated it.

-----------------

In the First place:

If this movie did NOT use Star Trek, People would not be so open to this JJ Abrams space film after seeing the trailer.

If this movie did NOT use Star Trek, most people (with a mind) would have been turned off from the film by The Little brat jumping out of car in slow-lo and meets a stormtrooper/cylon cop scene in the trailer, alone . This is not counting all the bad shit in the trailer.

__________

Here is a really good tip:

If you want to see a movie like this JJ Abrams' Star Trek, Then Just buy the film "Vampire Wars: Battle for the Universe".

 

 

Author
Time
C3PX said:

I still find it funny you come into a thread with a title that pretty much says, "hey let's complain about the new Trek film" and then complain about people complaining. The fact of the matter is, this film is simply screaming out, "Hate me, I am going to suck as hard as I possibly can." You can hope this film will be hugely successful and awesome all you like, but it isn't going to fix anything. The best you'll be able to do is lower your standards and pretend that it is good, seems to have worked well enough for SW fans over the last few years.

Yeah, I think the same things too.

C3PX said:

I have no doubt this will be a box office smash though, I'll be very surprised if it isn't.

yeah, it is just sad. Some/most People are just dumb, you would think after the past 3 bad star wars prequel films (and also all the other bad remakes) that People would think more before seeing another big CGI eye-candy re-______ or pre-________ film of a classic sci-fi tv show or Movies.

 

Remember the better time?

The Lost in Space Remake ----- failed

The Wild Wild West Remake ----- failed

The Godzilla Remake ----- failed

and so on....

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

We can only hope the finished movie is not as bad as the trailer.

 

If Abrams is really destroying Star Trek as you say Hunter6 then William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are helping him as is Jonathan Frakes.

Even that Phase II/ New Voyages fanfilm guy is defending him.

There is still not a finished cut of the movie the version that the nimoys watched had almost no finished effects and no music.  If the sillyness of the acting and dialogue can be fixed editorially and the music adds depth and emotion to the film it could be good.  I doubt JJ this late in the project is going to have new lines of dialogue written and acted by the actors, or redesign the enterprise bridge and exterior to please fans of either the tv show or old film franchise.

There is still little info out there were there any shots done with Models or Miniatures, or was the movie shot on film or HDcam.  I am sick of people calling a project shot on video a film as no film was used to shoot the fucking thing.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

Guys, here's the thing.

He's not making a movie to please you.  He's making a movie to tell a story that he wants to tell that works well within the Star Trek universe.  If you can't deal with that, well, don't go see it, and enjoy the 500 other episodes/movies that you can watch instead.  You say you want more Star Trek, then bitch about how the last X amount of Star Trek-related TV and movies have ruined the franchise.

Do what I do with Star Wars:  Pretend that those last X amount of things that ruined the franchise never happened.  Watch the things that you like - TOS and DS9, or TOS and TNG, or TNG and Voyager, whatever, and just pretend that the rest don't exist and never did.  Then, ignore anything else that comes out that doesn't look good, instead of constantly bitching about it because, guess what, THAT WON'T FUCKING CHANGE ANYTHING.

This philosophy has been working well for me - the films that came out in 1977, 1980, and 1983 exist, as do Timothy Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy.  After that, nothing ever happened, and I'm ignoring any new Star Wars that comes out that has to tie to the new movies and TV shows that don't exist to me.  I don't bitch about them, because it won't change anything.  They'll still be made, and there will still be people who will watch them.  But you don't have to.

I, for one, am going to give JJ's Trek a chance.  Why?  Because until I hear anything about the story and can base my judgment on that, nothing about the movie has made me think it'll be bad.

CG?  Who cares anymore?  All big-budget sci-fi movies today have tons of CG.  You can't not like a movie solely because of the effects.

The ship doesn't look like the TOS ship?  No shit - that ship was designed in the early '60s.  It would look dated as hell today.  And I think the new one looks pretty sweet while maintaining the basic overall design of the original.

The bridge doesn't look like the TOS bridge?  See above - that would look RETARDED today, I'm sorry but it's true.  If you're going to make something that takes place 200 years from now, the technology has to feel like it's 200 years ahead of us, or the audience isn't going to accept it.  TOS accomplished that in the '60s, but today people wouldn't accept that since that looks, well, like it's from the '60s.

If you're willing to give it a chance, don't bitch until you've seen it.  If you aren't willing to give it a chance, then pretend it's not happening and quit your whining and watch the hundreds of other Star Treks you could watch that you *do* like.

Author
Time

Dude, seriously, why are you wasting precious time chewing out people for complaining about Star Trek in a thread intended for complaining about Star Trek?

Following your same line of logic, there are a bazillion other threads for discussing ST on this forum, including at least one dedicated to the new movie, feel free to complain about complaining in there, but if you are getting annoyed at people giving the new film a hard time, maybe it wouldn't hurt to ignore this whole thread. 

Just a thought.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Besides JJ cannot kill Star Trek.  Star Trek already died with Enterprise and Nemesis and has only been kept alive by the fans who go to the conventions and read the novels.

A band put out an album called "its dead jim".  JJ is trying to Rebirth Trek at least as a viable film series again.

So Trek has died many deaths before and risen from the Ashes like the phoenix of mythology. 

Star Trek lives in the hearts and minds of millions of people.  It won't die if this film is sucessful or if it bombs only as far as the suits pulling the purse strings at the studio are concerned.  Star Trek like Star Wars is a part of American mythology and the names of its Characters are household names.  Even people who have never seen star trek have probably heard the line beam me up scotty, or know who kirk is or spock is.

Star Wars and Star Trek are incredibly seperated franchises one is science Fiction and the other space opera.

One is set in our own imagined future and another a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.

Still i like both, not equally mind you Trek tos was my dads franchise.  I like Star Wars better.   I used to like Next Generation better, until i liked films 1-6 and watched the re-runs.  I Still loved the original series as a kid i just thought the effects were cheesy after seeing Star Wars, though the effects on the slow and boring motion picture blew me away.  Spocks death in Trek II as a child nearly brought me to tears, yeah i was one of those people who cried when Optimus Prime died in the Transformers movie too.

The stealing of the enterprise in part 3 was awesome.  It still gives me chills every time i watch it.

I don't even care that that scene may have been stolen from a Space Battleship Yamato film, or it could be a co-incidance as i believe it to be.  Farewell to Space Battleship Yamato was made before star trek III.

 

People get to the point where they are so confortable with the fictional characters in Star Trek or Star Wars, that they almost become their friends in adventure.  Like the screen heroes of old.  When kids wanted to be Like Stewart Granger, Eroll Flynn, Sinbad, or Zorro.  The viewer or the reader pretty much goes on the journey the hero does, at least in a sucessful film or novel.

First you need a character you are sympathetic to, an everyman Like Luke Skywalker, or Frodo Baggins.

Lucas failed with Anakin Skywalker as nobody cared for his journey or felt sympathetic to him as a work of fiction.  It was like Trying to make the Devil a Sympathetic character which Milton could do in Paradise Lost but Lucas is no Milton,lol.

James Kirk as originally created and as played by Shatner was not an everyman.  He was the top of his class, and a pile of books with legs.  Shatner's inspiration was Alexander the great i believe as a stageplay he was in.  The JJ kirk is either a new creation or an composite of the character created by Roddenberry, added to by Nick Meyer etc.

Hopefully they don't steal the Enterprise as cadets in this movie i Seriously laughed out loud when shatner did that in his novel the academy.  Still that book had Kirk steal a federation vehicle and Spock was at a brothel to investigate art theft,lol. Not too much a surprise since Shatner's Young Kirk has already been done under the Name of Jim Endicott, and they are almost the same character.

I think JJ is a talented guy but he has a lot to prove as this is only his second film he is directing, He still has to overcome those who say he is only a tv director.  This being his sophmore effort, since he declined to direct cloverfield because he needed the time to work on this movie.   MI3 was quite good if it was a tv episode it kind of even reminded me of the old 60's show in that light.  But as a movie the scale was not big enough or broad enough an idea or execution.  After MI2 which was a huge expensive blockbuster.  I wonder if JJ understands that movies are supposed to have a large epic scale.

The one thing MI3 did that the first 2 films did not do was focus on the characters not just on the visual effects and stunts.

Still the guys who wrote this New Trek wrote Bay's Transformers also and that had bad jokes and cringeworthy dialogue lots of sexual innuendo and explosions.  The Trailer for trek gives me the Transformers feeling. and as that movie made tons of money that seems to be the direction they are aiming for.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
C3PX said:

Dude, seriously, why are you wasting precious time chewing out people for complaining about Star Trek in a thread intended for complaining about Star Trek?

Following your same line of logic, there are a bazillion other threads for discussing ST on this forum, including at least one dedicated to the new movie, feel free to complain about complaining in there, but if you are getting annoyed at people giving the new film a hard time, maybe it wouldn't hurt to ignore this whole thread. 

Just a thought.

You know what?  You're right.

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

We can only hope the finished movie is not as bad as the trailer.

Please read this:

from:      http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/20/anthonys-thoughts-on-the-la-star-trek-movie-presentation/

Spock has jettisoned Kirk onto a frozen planet, where he has met the older Spock (Leonard Nimoy). The scene starts with Kirk entering some kind of lab or workshop where he and Spock meet Montgomery Scotty (Simon Pegg) and his pint-sized alien friend. Scotty thinks they are there to resupply him and he starts complaining about the food and how long he has been stationed at this outpost after his failed attempt to transport Admiral Archer’s ‘prize beagle’ (Kirk notes that he knows the dog and asks how it is, Scotty says he will tell him when it shows up again).

If Abrams is really destroying Star Trek as you say Hunter6 then William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are helping him as is Jonathan Frakes.

Even that Phase II/ New Voyages fanfilm guy is defending him.

that Phase II/ New Voyages fanfilm guy (James Cawley) had his butt kiss by JJ and his crew.

James Cawley was handed a role in this new star trek. James Cawley was treated like a VIP and so on. 

James Cawley's word can not really be trusted right now.

 

Leonard Nimoy is in the movie and really believes in passing the ears to a new person which good hearted of him.

 

Jonathan Frakes has sometimes very bad taste just look at the last ep of ST:ENT which he stared in.

 

William Shatner in the past attacked this film. Then, out of the blue, Shatner changed his actions. It is unknown why Shatner changed his actions.

 

There is still not a finished cut of the movie the version that the nimoys watched had almost no finished effects and no music.  If the sillyness of the acting and dialogue can be fixed editorially and the music adds depth and emotion to the film it could be good.  I doubt JJ this late in the project is going to have new lines of dialogue written and acted by the actors, or redesign the enterprise bridge and exterior to please fans of either the tv show or old film franchise. There is still little info out there were there any shots done with Models or Miniatures, or was the movie shot on film or HDcam.  I am sick of people calling a project shot on video a film as no film was used to shoot the fucking thing.

The Movie is Fully Finish and has been for months now. It is just sit in a can because of the date change from Dec 08 to May 09. It was made with HD DIGITAL CAMERAS. There are 3 enterprise designs in this movie. No Ship Models. The VFX are cgi.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

also The USS Kelvin is named after J. J. Abrams' grandfather.

also Steven Spielberg who had partially convinced Abrams to direct because he liked the script (Spielberg also liked the scripts for Transfromers, Eagle Eye and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ), and he even advised the action scenes during his visit (like he did for SW: EP III).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

In Shatner's defense i'll argue that he is being nice to JJ in his own best interest.  Because if Kirk is to Return it will be in the sequel and Shatner wants JJ to have him in the sequel if offered a real part and not a cameo as older Kirk.

The only thing is nero's fucking with the timeline would have to explain why James Kirk did not dissapear from the enterprise B only to come out of the nexus to aid picard and die on veridian III.

Because Trek 2009 is Spock Centric William Shatner is betting on the Next one focusing on Kirk.  I would guess though Chris Pine will Play Kirk in the sequel and JJ will play at being very coy about why not having Shatner in the movie instead of telling him your too fucking old.

Maybe Shatners ego got in the way of him having a part in this film? 

It being pretty much on the record from everyone else but Shatner the reason why Trek V was a dissaster was his ego.

You have to agree the old cast is too OLd to reprise their roles and get another original series picture.  It is about 15-20 years too late for that.  for a real star trek VII they would have to have started pre production in 1991, with the film to come out in 1993 or 1994.  This is 2008 those actors are now old enough to be grandfathers and grandmothers if not great grandfathers and great grandmothers.

The ashes of Eden would have made a great star trek VII, or the Return would have made a great star trek VIII after Generations.  But its time to let it go.  The closest thing you will ever get to another big screen adventure is the graphic novel for ashes of eden, or the actors cameos in starfleet academy.

You will have to be Happy with the cameo roles they had in the Star Trek next generation universe.  Kelley in Encounter at Farpoint parts 1 and 2, Nimoy in Unification Parts 1 and 2, and Doohan in Relics.  As well as Shatner, Doohan and Koenig in Generations. Also George Takei got to play Sulu on Deep Space nine. 

This is not including the Cowley fanfilms Starring Koenig or Takei, or the fanfilm by the Tim Russ that Also had Koenig, and Nichelle Nichols.

This also does not include Shatner reprising his role for Kirk in the Books on tape based on his kirk novels, or the other actors doing books on tape.  It also does not include the videogames Like Legacy.

Too bad the Last time Shatner will Play Kirk was in the Legacy game.  Kind of like How Sean Connerys last outing as James Bond was for the From Russia with Love game or Pierce Brosnans in Everything or Nothing.

The last time Mark Hamill played Luke Skywalker was doing the voice for a television commercial for Vector Prime.  I think they also Asked him to voice the first rogue squadron game, and jedi academy but he turned them down and they used pre recorded lines from the movies or hired a different actor.  Him voicing the character was not out of the realm of possibility as he did voice over work on Lucasrts full throttle.  But he wanted nothing to do with the character of Luke or Star Wars.  I think he was even asked to write some star wars comics by dark horse at one point and said he was not interested.

Being a voice over for animation i am very surprised he has not done any voice work on the new clone wars cartoon, He could voice any character as a cameo. 

Similarly Paramount could do another Trek animated series and ask the actors to voice their characters.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Hunter6 said:
C3PX said:

I still find it funny you come into a thread with a title that pretty much says, "hey let's complain about the new Trek film" and then complain about people complaining. The fact of the matter is, this film is simply screaming out, "Hate me, I am going to suck as hard as I possibly can." You can hope this film will be hugely successful and awesome all you like, but it isn't going to fix anything. The best you'll be able to do is lower your standards and pretend that it is good, seems to have worked well enough for SW fans over the last few years.

Yeah, I think the same things too.

C3PX said:

I have no doubt this will be a box office smash though, I'll be very surprised if it isn't.

yeah, it is just sad. Some/most People are just dumb, you would think after the past 3 bad star wars prequel films (and also all the other bad remakes) that People would think more before seeing another big CGI eye-candy re-______ or pre-________ film of a classic sci-fi tv show or Movies.

 

Remember the better time?

The Lost in Space Remake ----- failed

The Wild Wild West Remake ----- failed

The Godzilla Remake ----- failed

and so on....

 

 

I'M GUESSING YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED THE NEWLY REMASTERED TOS.  YOU KNOW, IT'S THE ONE WITH THE UPDATED SFX?

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide