This what I posted last week, as "Star Trek: The Re-Machined Picture"; I'll just re-post it here: ~~~"My wife and I attended a Midnight showing of the new "Star Trek" movie last night. As a lifelong Trekker, I'd been doing some serious geeking out, in these last few weeks, anticipating the rebirth of my love. But for diehard Treknerds like myself, it all comes down to this quote, from director JJ Abrams: ""I was never r
Well, that's one. How many Trek fans are there out there? I've found quite a few who didn't care for the changes. They're screwing with success here....why, is anyone's guess.
Understood. But question: How do you reboot the franchise and wipe out the entire 43-year continuity of five entire series of hundreds of episodes and ten movies (not to mention the thousands of books), without "alienating all the fans by tossing aside the well-loved and already established content"? You can't. They did that, though, and I think that in the next movie, they'll need to go back and patch up the timeline, so that it fa
[quote]But you are saying that phase weapons = phasers. That's never been said anywhere. I was trying to illustrate the point that "phase weapons" could have been a technology that evolved into "lasers", which then evolved into "phasers". The assumption being made is "phase weapons" and "phasers" are more advanced than "lasers". I personally don't like the mention of lasers at all, and I would be happy to cut them out entirely. Just like they say in The Cage that "the time barrier
[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="19" id="2203834"]I thnk you. Maybe me and the other "gay guys", it's hard to tell with Zyxpsilon. I for one think you are perfectly on topic. [/quote] I thought so, too......? I just thought of another error they made; Delta Vega (the planet on which Gary Mitchell would be killed) is no where near Vulcan. Yet, there was Spock, standing on the its icy surface (it wasn't icy in the TV show, by the by) watching Vulcan implode and disappear into t
[quote]Robert April's role as the first captain of the Enterprise is debatable. He is only mentioned in the animated series. Paramount and Gene Roddenberry simply decided not to consider the animated series for Star Trek continuity. That being said, it would be more of an error, if the movie actually mentioned Robert April as the first captain.[/quote]---Spooky Toward the end of his life, Roddenberry, and Trek writer DC Fontana, both urged the acceptance of the Animated Series into th
[quote]Stray too far away from this thread topic once more and i'll have to ask for moderators either to give a much more complex Report button or to lock it for everyone else... which constitutes your last warning.[/quote] Who are you talking to, exactly? Thanks for the link.
Spooky: I understand all that, but see, as a lifelong Trek fan....to me, it's an error. Kirk's father was indeed killed, but when Kirk was in his early teens. He knew his father. Kirk also had an older brother (born before the change in the timeline), George Samuel, called "Sam". Also, the first Enterprise captain was Robert April (again, before the chnage in the timeline), not Pike. So many more things I could pick on. I reiterate that I liked this as a movi
[quote]I should point out that the idea that lasers are less advanced than phase weapons is your own idea. I never really liked the lasers in The Cage anyway, but I can accept them as a stepping stone between basic beam weaponry (phase pistols) and more advanced ones (phasers). All three techs could be very similar, just with different nomenclature (speaking GalCiv-ish, they'd be Laser I, Laser II, and Laser III).[/quote]--Minor race That's not what I'm saying; they had "phase weapons
Kirk, I might add, was 34 when he took command of the Enterprise. There are so many continuity errors, and, yes, whacky coincidences, in this movie, it was actually hard to watch. I liked it as a stand-alone action movie, but it had nothing to do with the Trek universe I know and love. But...oh, yeah; it's different now. Bullshite.
[quote]ENT made a handful of changes to established continuity in TOS and TNG, but for the most part the only continuity it messed with was "fanon/licensed continuity". An example would be the Klingon ridges. An unofficial explanation was provided in a book somewhere, and at that point people just accepted it because it was never really established in the official continuity. Suddenly it is established officially though, and people might get a little annoyed about ENT messing with 'establishe
I might add that this "altering" of the timeline is one of the reasons "Enterprise" was never fully accepted by the fans.
Very much liked it as a stand-alone movie, absolutely hated it for the way it radically alters the established Trek timeline and blows overs so many established details and relationships. In too many ways, this movie has absolutely nothing to do with the Trek we fans know and love. They pretty much ignored 43 years of established Trek history. I think they're going to have to write another movie, where they go back and patch up the timeline, so it falls back in with the esta
Liked it as a stand-alone movie, hated it for the way it radically alters the established Trek timeline and blows overs so many established details and relationships. In too many ways, this movie has absolutely nothing to do with the Trek we fans know and love. They pretty much simply ignored 43 years of established Trek history. I think they're going to have to write another movie, where they go back and patch up the timeline, so it falls back in with the established hi
Did any of you see the movie, yet? I posted a spoiler-free review: "Star Trek: The Re-Machined Picture" https://forums.joeuser.com/351120/#2196948 I'd like to discuss it with some serious fans.[e digicons]:borg:[/e]
Are you a Trekker?
The wife and I attended a Midnight showing of the new "Star Trek" movie last night. As a lifelong Trekker, I'd been doing some serious geeking out, in these last few weeks, anticipating the rebirth of my love. But for diehard Treknerds like myself, it all comes down to this quote, from director JJ Abrams: ""I was never really a fan of 'Star Trek,' ". And that says everything. In some interviews, it is revealed that the cast and crew are seemingly somewhat contemptuous of the
"I thought that was a swastika that he was getting."---karmagirl No, no, no! It's a Star, Hammer and Sickle over a swastika; he's taking the best of both tyrannies and making his own hybrid regime. Communism with Nazi tactics; can't go wrong!
[quote]Also because they needed a way to get around the plot-hole they'd made when they originally said Romulans didn't have warp tech. They gave the Klingons warp drive and they "traded" it for the Cloaking Device. I guess that's a fair trade...[/quote] Good point. "It probable was during the serious but in the movies it is called the flagship at least once. Don't remember which movie tho."--danielost They mention it in "Generations", when wondering why the Dura
I've been at this blogging game for several years, now; in fact, I was introduced to the blogosphere right here, on good ole JU. Thanks, Drag! &
Double post deleted
[quote who="taltamir" reply="25" id="2088230"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_negro I keep seeing flash presentation showing all the presidents, and then obama, and then proud proclamations that "change has arrived". considering he is not the first democrat in office i can only imagine that the liberals are talking about his skin color, way to go racial profiling someone. [/quote] True....but then, if they really wanted to convey the "change" he
My only problem with Byrd here is that he could stand up and voice some concerns about the fact that Obama has yet to produce a valid birth certificate. The old man's supposed to be such a "Constitutional scholar"; you'd think he'd find that fact a little disconcerting, constitutionally speaking.
I recently found myself in a rather odd situation; that is, actually agreeing with a Democratic Senator. That’s right…..and it felt strange. My world was upside down; I felt as if I was going a little crazy. But no..... I actually agreed with Sen. Robert Byrd, when he said that Obama appointing “czars” of health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change would amount to a “pow
You know what I think? I think he's afraid.....he's afraid someone will cap him before he gets anything much done. I honestly believe that; and I really think that's why he's hurrying all this stuff into operation. And I mean hurrying; he visited Bush what, a week after the election? That's the earliest any president-elect has ever done so. He gave his first quasi-"State of the Union" address just a few weeks ago, and last week he spoke to Congress; again, much earlier
JoeUser Forums
Stardock Forums