All Things Star Trek — Page 48

doubleofive said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I heard that J. Michael Straczynski pitched the idea for a reboot of TOS to Paramount some years back, and I can't help but wonder how it would have turned out if they had gone through with making it*.

 

*Still probably better than everything I've read about Abramstrek. 

Funny you should mention that:

http://trek-fm.squarespace.com/standard-orbit/38

Here's the pitch if you want to check it out.

http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf

 Wow,I have had my problems with some of JMS's writing in the past decade so I wasn't expecting to like this but I did.  I really like that pitch and the DNA idea that would give them a mystery to explore and explain why all the aliens are budget friendly.  i would much rather have gotten that series then the last two movies.  Too bad:(

Tobar said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Here is what the writers of the new trek just don't understand. The reasons we love Kirk and he has become a timeless character have nothing to do with internet memes about how awesome Kirk is.  We don't love Kirk because he beds green alien woman,we don't love Kirk because he kicks everyone's asses in fistfights,and we don't love him because he refuses to obey the rules.  No we love him because he has a strong moral core in addition to those things and without that moral core he is nothing. remember the framing device for Star trek is that these are entries from kirk's official logs that go to starfleet so every time he breaks the rules he is putting it in the ship's log,that is how much his word means to him.  He know it could cost him his job but he is not about to lie or put his crew in the position of having to cover up for him when he breaks the rules. If he breaks them it's for a good moral reason and his only defense he explaining why he felt the rules had to be broken that is one reason we love him.

 This.

 Yeah that is why I will never watch ITD because I felt like I was watching the writers stab Kirk in the back be removing his moral core and if the character doesn't have that then I can't really root for him so I am not invested in what is going on.  The way he treats Spock for not lying is just so far out of character I don't think you can even call him Kirk any more.  That is without the other problems this film has like there being a cure for death in a bottle. How is any action scene in any future Star Trek movie supposed to have any tension if there are a bunch of frozen people out there who have a cure for death in their blood?

SilverWook said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Tobar said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Here is what the writers of the new trek just don't understand. The reasons we love Kirk and he has become a timeless character have nothing to do with internet memes about how awesome Kirk is.  We don't love Kirk because he beds green alien woman,we don't love Kirk because he kicks everyone's asses in fistfights,and we don't love him because he refuses to obey the rules.  No we love him because he has a strong moral core in addition to those things and without that moral core he is nothing. remember the framing device for Star trek is that these are entries from kirk's official logs that go to starfleet so every time he breaks the rules he is putting it in the ship's log,that is how much his word means to him.  He know it could cost him his job but he is not about to lie or put his crew in the position of having to cover up for him when he breaks the rules. If he breaks them it's for a good moral reason and his only defense he explaining why he felt the rules had to be broken that is one reason we love him.

 This.

 Yeah that is why I will never watch ITD because I felt like I was watching the writers stab Kirk in the back be removing his moral core and if the character doesn't have that then I can't really root for him so I am not invested in what is going on.  The way he treats Spock for not lying is just so far out of character I don't think you can even call him Kirk any more.  That is without the other problems this film has like there being a cure for death in a bottle. How is any action scene in any future Star Trek movie supposed to have any tension if there are a bunch of frozen people out there who have a cure for death in their blood?

 Alternate timeline. This Kirk hasn't had all the same experiences, not to mention he didn't grow up with his father around.

The transporter in theory can be used to restore someone to life, but that has been avoided for decades. We're never going to hear from Khan's magic blood again.

 That doesn't make him any less unlikable.  Under that logic anyone who grew up without a father should be allowed to do anything he wants and no one should be able to say anything about it.  Also why bring the character back if that isn't the character they want to write?  if the character is nothing like Kirk then why call him Kirk?  If it's just for marketing then how does that make ITD a good movie and how does it change the fact that Kirk is going down the same path is was in the first movie only this time he is even more of a jerk?

Oh no the transporter has to have a living pattern so it can't bring people back to life and sweeping the blood under the carpet is just stupid since it makes it look like the characters are idiots.  if in future movies you have to pretend this stuff doesn't exist then it shouldn't have been included in the script in the first place. Any first year creative writing student could tell you that.  So you have your character backslide so that all his growth in the last film never happened,and you have stuff in your script that you will have to pretend never existed in all future scripts. How is that good writing again?  it's not good writing and I don't care how you explain it if your "hero" is a complete jerk who never learns anything then I am not going to root for him or care about the story and it's the writer's job to make me care so that is not just bad writing for a feature film it's below the level of most fan fiction.  This script that writers were paid money for has problems that wouldn't be accepted in fan fiction that is written for free. That is just bad.

I wanted to like this movie,i went in expecting it to be good,but it has displaced A night in Sickbay as the worst thing ever to be filmed under the Star trek name. I meant it when I said i thought Khan would make a better captain then "kirk" in this movie.

here is the real problem in a nutshell.  We were told that the reason the franchise was being rebooted was so we could get back to basics and return to the characters that are loved. So if that was the goal then shouldn't they be trying to capture what made the characters so loved in the first place?  What is the point of doing this if what we love about the characters is just tossed in a garbage can?  I mean if the goal is to show that a Kirk who grew up without his father would be a jerk couldn't that be handled by one film or one episode of the Tv show,I think we get the point now.Is the point of the Star trek franchise from this point on just to say kirk didn't have his daddy so now he is a jerk? I think we get the point,can we move on now? Oh and this father who is so important to kirk becoming a hero was never mentioned once in three years of live action TV,two of animation,and seven movies,that is how important George Kirk was.

As i said they didn't reboot Doctor Who by having the Doctor bed Rose,have him played by the Rock,and having him gun down people in the street. They stayed true to the character while updating the format and the situations he was in,that is how you do a reboot.

SilverWook said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Tobar said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Sorry but they stated lazers can't pass through deflector shields and the Star Wars ships can't fight at lightspeed or faster and some of those number are way off.  I mean if the Empire's ships can travel that fast then there is no way Han could ever escape them with the falcon traveling at a mere point five past light speed and besides if we go by what is shown instead of dialog then in Star Trek five the Enterprise traveled from earth to the center of the galaxy in a couple of hours.

 

The infamous "no lasers" argument.

In one particular episode of TNG, we heard the following exchange:

DATA: Sensors report a minimum range combat craft of the Squadron Class, twenty-six crew.

WORF: Captain, they have locked lasers.

PICARD: Lasers?

RIKER: That won't even penetrate our navigational deflectors.

Literary method: they seem to be saying that their navigational deflectors are immune to lasers, probably because lasers are supposed to be less advanced than phasers. Some people feel that this means any Federation ship could shrug off any laser, even a monster laser that can blow up planets. Others feel that Riker was factoring the ship's small size into account, and that his statement was not meant to be so over-arching. However, it is impossible to conclusively resolve this argument one way or another unless we can get some kind of official statement from the author on the episode, and that's not forthcoming.

Suspension of Disbelief: it is scientifically impossible for any kind of shield to block infinite amounts of laser energy, because the second law of thermodynamics prohibits 100% efficiency devices and light carries momentum equal to U/c, so there are two mechanisms through which increased power levels would eventually overwhelm any blocking system. Therefore, Riker was either an idiot or he was taking the enemy ship's small size into account when he made his statement. Case closed.

The Federation controls a portion of a single quadrant of the galaxy. The Galactic Empire controls their entire galaxy.

When the U.S.S. Voyager was flung to the other side of the galaxy they estimated it would take 75 years to make it back home.

In Star Wars their galaxy can be traversed from one end to the other in a matter of weeks.

 That still leaves Star trek five out there where an unfinished and damaged Enterprise was able to travel from Earth(A planet out near the edge of the galaxy)to the center of the galaxy in a matter of hours. One thing that I am surprised has not been brought up is maybe the ships have the same top speed or they are slow enough for the falcon with a top speed of point five past light speed to be one of the fastest ships in the galaxy,maybe the galaxy Star Wars takes place in is much smaller then our own.  Galaxies come in different sizes and all we know is that the Star Wars galaxy is far far away.  If it was much smaller then our own that would explain a lot of things including the falcon being fast despite it being too slow to get anywhere in our galaxy in under a few months or years,and all the planets seeming to be so close to each other.

 Where in the movie is it said the ship is unfinished and damaged? It needs a lot of debugging though. It speaks ill of the Starfleet shipyards that the Enterprise A was even launched with that many problems with it's systems. Must have been the low bidder that fitted her out. ;)

 You are right it was bugs not being unfinished.  Still can you blame me for being confused?  I mean the doors didn't even work for crying out loud,it's no wonder my brain remembers it as being unfinished! You know the computer seemed to be working so badly I just assumed it was running off of the 23rd century version of Vista. I mean good night!

With Genesis it was explained that it only worked for Spock because his body landed there at the right moment and the device was made with banned matter that caused the whole planet to blow up. So you would have to blow up a planet every time you wanted someone back and you would run the risk of them aging to death.  Then you have the issue of memories.  The new person looks the same but they don't have the memories. Spock only got his memories back because he put them in McCoy.  So genesis was not a cure all for death the way Khan's blood was.  Oh Khan still comes from before the time line was altered so how come he had a death cure in his blood but the old Khan didn't?

      In the new Trek universe, an expo drop about the red matter black hole showing up more than 9 months before the birth and the Kelvin being sent out on a long journey would explain the differences in appearance.

Here's a story about Henry Rollins recording "I Can't Get Behind That" with William Shatner. Fun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnXAb6IKeeE&t=4m40s

DrCrowTStarwars said:

As i said ...t reboot Doctor Who ... have him played by the Rock,...

 Best Idea Evar Crow!

DuracellEnergizer said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Sorry but they stated lazers can't pass through deflector shields and the Star Wars ships can't fight at lightspeed or faster and some of those number are way off.

I don't think Star Wars lasers are literal lasers. They travel slower than light and, except in the case of the Death Stars, they come in the form of bolts or bursts rather than beams.

Regardless, though, I wouldn't take the word of anything found on stardestroyer.net at face value. Michael Wong's got a less-than-subtle contempt for the Star Trek franchise and it blatantly shows; you can't trust his "facts" to be unbiased.

 I agree that there's nothing in Star Wars to imply those weapons are LASERS as we define the term IRL. In fact, every single observable trait about the weapons used in Star Wars shows they are not LASERS.

But the neat thing about facts is that it doesn't matter what your opinion is. Whether Wong likes Trek or not, his sources are heavily cited, from manuals and onscreen, and his math adds up.

Okay I just watched SF Debris' review of Parturition and again like a lot of Voyager I had not seen this since it aired on UPN and is it just me or is this a perfect example of why Nelix is worse then Jar Jar Binks?! I mean at least Jar Jar cared about people and was always trying to help,he never went out of his way to make things worse! I mean if this were any of other character in any other Star trek show acting the way Nelix does in this one it would be a sign that some sort of alien thing was in his head and messing with his brain because no one would ever act this way and expect not to be thrown off the ship but in this case it's just Nelix being Nelix,no alien stuff or mind control involved. Nelix really is this big of a stupid asshole! Why couldn't he have been the character who died every other week instead of Harry?

It's Neelix, not Nelix.

And yes, I hate his character. The funny thing that Voyager is the first show where I hated main or secondary characters.

- Neelix

- that little girl - Naomi? The first time I was hoping a character dies

- the borg kids - another time I was hoping I see a character die on screen

- the holographic doctor - I must admit that I like Picardo's performance, there's something about the character that I just hate. Maybe the fact that they portrait him as a character, even though he's supposed to be a piece of software

- that annoying bitch Neelix used to date in the first episodes - can't remember her name, I just found her extremely annoying

- I originally hated Janeway, Chacotay and Tuvok, but I learned to accept them over the years. ACCEPT them, NOT LIKE them.

I think the only characters I liked on Voyager were Tom Paris and Harry Kim. Which is weird. I used to love all TOS characters. I used to love all TNG characters (including Wesley, who seemed to be hated by the "general public"). Then Voyager came with its horrible characters. And then they brought a horrible character to DS9 - that jazz singing idiot - I can't remember his name - I absolutely hated that guy and can't understand why they gave him more and more space. Absolutely useless and badly written character.

Okay you say you loved TNG and all the characters,I assume that includes Data who just had software running him but then you go on a rant about how the Voyager writers treated the Doc like he was a person instead of software and you seem really angry.HoloDoc along with Tom,Kes,and 7 was one of the only bright spots on Voyager and may be the only reason I watched all seven years of the show.

As for Vic he had maybe 15 minutes and two episodes out of two seasons on DS9 and he was a good character played by an actor who could sing?!  I mean it may be the only time in Tv history a character who was a singer was played by an actor who could sing and if you want to understand why fans like myself love him then take a look at this.  It's one of my favorite episodes of Star Trek fullstop and and I think this review says it all.

http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/ds9-it-s-only-a-paper-moon-review-4683748

Now compare that to this and I don't see how you can say Vic ever reached Nelix levels even if you didn't care for him.

http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/voy-parturition-review-6350892

Now please bare in mind I have no love of Voyager and have not watched most of it since it first aired almost 20 years ago but I think you are being a little too hard on the characters and the writers and you seem to have a real personal hatred directed towards them.