Topic: No word on Star Trek XI...

[Vipre]

ST:II and III seem like halves of a whole to me and storywise with ST:IV you could call it a "Death and Rebirth of Spock" trilogy.

Does this mean that V-VII are the Death of Kirk Trilogy?  Where Kirk says he knows he's going to die alone in V....has problems in VI...and then disappears alone...and brought back and then dies in VII?

Hadn't thought of that but I suppose you could.

The difference in my eye though is that major parts of III and IV revolved around Spock's death and difficulties after coming back to life, III as we know being almost totally about how far the crew would go to recover his body even to the point of completely throwing their careers away. IV used it mostly for comedic effect unfortunately but it was still a major part. Kirk's on the other hand was not the focus of V, VI or VII, his death in VII just being a way to pass the torch and more a parallel of ST:II and Spock's Death. Had the next two been based on Shatner's books then there'd be IMO a comparable Kirk Death/Life trilogy.

ST:II, III, IV are linked together fairly solidly though just in the way that III picks up almost right where II leaves off showing the aftermath and IV starts I think six months after III ends and finishes with the consequences of the actions in III. The last three don't have that same type of connection.

[knightstorm]

ST:II and III seem like halves of a whole to me and storywise with ST:IV you could call it a "Death and Rebirth of Spock" trilogy.

Does this mean that V-VII are the Death of Kirk Trilogy?  Where Kirk says he knows he's going to die alone in V....has problems in VI...and then disappears alone...and brought back and then dies in VII?

No.  2-4 were loosely planned out ahead of time as a coherent storyline.  Also, originally, the Excelsior was supposed to become the new Enterprise, but alot of fans reacted hostily to the idea because lets face it, The refit constitution class was probably the most aesthetically pleasing of all of the Enterprise models.

[knightstorm]

also, another area which shows the high and mighty producers didn't bother to do research is the uniforms.  While I can't say I'm against mini-skirts , the uniform used in both TOS pilots is of a different design. 

[James Smith]

also, another area which shows the high and mighty producers didn't bother to do research is the uniforms.  While I can't say I'm against mini-skirts , the uniform used in both TOS pilots is of a different design.

Oh, for the love of God.....

It's a re-boot, not a direct prequel to TOS as we know it. They could have done whatever they wanted with the uniforms. It isn't an example of "the high and mighty producers" stomping all over the beloved Trek universe.

[knightstorm]

Oh, for the love of God.....

It's a re-boot, not a direct prequel to TOS as we know it. They could have done whatever they wanted with the uniforms. It isn't an example of "the high and mighty producers" stomping all over the beloved Trek universe.

ITS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A REBOOT.  They said they were going to be respectful of cannon.  So that makes them liars.  I don't consider the uniforms that important, but the fact that they couldn't even get that right is more evidence that they are going over the franchise with a blunt instrument.  Add to that the fact that Abrams once submitted some crazy martial arts/sci-fi script as his pitch for the superman film I have cause to be concerned.

[dragoon]

They have said it's not a reboot, but also not meant to be a direct prequel. They are following "cannon" but also taking some of the best stuff from various books too, that they feel make sense and add to the film.

However, you have got to remember that they don't want to weigh the film down with "Cannon" to the point that a new audience feels like they can't get into it.
If they made the film for people who nit-pick over uniforms, or nacelle fins ( as an example ), then it will never make enough money to deserve a sequel. This film can not be made just for us, it has to appeal to a new audience too, and by going back to just before TOS, they are offering new viewers the chance to get into the wider stories.

That depends of course, that new audiences could ignore the age of TOS after watching this. I for one am happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[knightstorm]

They have said it's not a reboot, but also not meant to be a direct prequel. They are following "cannon" but also taking some of the best stuff from various books too, that they feel make sense and add to the film.

However, you have got to remember that they don't want to weigh the film down with "Cannon" to the point that a new audience feels like they can't get into it.
If they made the film for people who nit-pick over uniforms, or nacelle fins ( as an example ), then it will never make enough money to deserve a sequel. This film can not be made just for us, it has to appeal to a new audience too, and by going back to just before TOS, they are offering new viewers the chance to get into the wider stories.

That depends of course, that new audiences could ignore the age of TOS after watching this. I for one am happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not nitpicking.  If you had bothered to read my previous posts fully, I gave reasons why I feel these things are important.  The look they give the Enterprise represents the overall tone of the  film.  The fact that they gave it tail fins means they're probably going to stick it in some sort of Flash Gordonesque adventure.  As I also stated the uniforms aren't really that important, but with everything else, it shows they really didn't put a lot of effort into respecting cannon despite their earlier promises.  We're talking about a guy who wanted to have a Kung Fu Superman in a cybersuit battle a kryptonian Lex Luthor.  There is a good chance that he will keep the name, but produce a product that is definitely not Star Trek.

[James Smith]

ITS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A REBOOT. 

Really? Sure looks like a reboot to me.

They said they were going to be respectful of cannon.  So that makes them liars.

Being 'respectful' of Trek canon doesn't mean 'follow it slavishly'.

I don't consider the uniforms that important

Apparently, you do....you're certainly making a fairly big deal out of it in this thread.

but the fact that they couldn't even get that right is more evidence that they are going over the franchise with a blunt instrument.

Melodramatic, much? It's not like they're calling warp drive "hyperspace". Or giving the Enterprise plasma cannons. Or making Scotty a girl.

Canon is great. It's nice when a universe hangs together coherently. But canon has been overtaken by events in the Real World™, and has even been re-written within the Trek universe by the various powers that be over the years. And at the end of the day - we're talking about uniforms here FFS!

Add to that the fact that Abrams once submitted some crazy martial arts/sci-fi script as his pitch for the superman film I have cause to be concerned.

And you think that not using the "Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms is on that level, huh? Yikes.

I'll say again - canon is great, but to say that they have to follow it exactly when it doesn't even hang together absolutely perfectly anyway is a bit short-sighted.

[knightstorm]

ITS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A REBOOT. 

Really? Sure looks like a reboot to me.

They said they were going to be respectful of cannon.  So that makes them liars.

Being 'respectful' of Trek canon doesn't mean 'follow it slavishly'.

I don't consider the uniforms that important

Apparently, you do....you're certainly making a fairly big deal out of it in this thread.

but the fact that they couldn't even get that right is more evidence that they are going over the franchise with a blunt instrument.

Melodramatic, much? It's not like they're calling warp drive "hyperspace". Or giving the Enterprise plasma cannons. Or making Scotty a girl.

Canon is great. It's nice when a universe hangs together coherently. But canon has been overtaken by events in the Real World™, and has even been re-written within the Trek universe by the various powers that be over the years. And at the end of the day - we're talking about uniforms here FFS!

Add to that the fact that Abrams once submitted some crazy martial arts/sci-fi script as his pitch for the superman film I have cause to be concerned.

And you think that not using the "Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms is on that level, huh? Yikes.

I'll say again - canon is great, but to say that they have to follow it exactly when it doesn't even hang together absolutely perfectly anyway is a bit short-sighted.

If you had bothered using that lump of matter between your ears I wouldn't have to repeat myself in saying that the uniform is not important as long as they don't make severe changes to cannon.  The only reason I brought it up is that from what little they have released about the film, it doesn't seem to be keeping with their promise to respect cannon.  And excuse me if my decision to not write in simple sentences, and to make use metaphors offends you.  As for my comparison to the superman pitch, lets face it superman is definitely more iconic than star trek, and if he was willing to do that to him, imagine what he wants to do here.

[James Smith]

If you had bothered using that lump of matter between your ears I wouldn't have to repeat myself in saying that the uniform is not important as long as they don't make severe changes to cannon.

Oh, I see. We're going to be like that are we? Fair enough.

Quick point. Your quote that I replied to was:

also, another area which shows the high and mighty producers didn't bother to do research is the uniforms.  While I can't say I'm against mini-skirts  , the uniform used in both TOS pilots is of a different design.

So, no mention of it not being important as long as severe changes to canon are not made. But what the hell, right? I mean, I ought to have been able to read your ******* mind....

The only reason I brought it up is that from what little they have released about the film, it doesn't seem to be keeping with their promise to respect cannon.

They're keeping a lid on the details. I see no reason to worry about their respect or (or lack of respect) for canon until we have rather more than tail fins on the nacelles and the style of the uniforms....

And excuse me if my decision to not write in simple sentences, and to make use metaphors offends you.

Believe me princess, if your post had offended me I simply wouldn't have replied to it. I just found it fascinating that you were whinging about the damned uniforms and holding them up as an example of how disrespectful of canon the film-makers were being.

As for my comparison to the superman pitch, lets face it superman is definitely more iconic than star trek, and if he was willing to do that to him, imagine what he wants to do here.

Oh, okay. So we're going to complain about the potential for them to completely disregard Trek canon, rather than complain about them actually disregarding Trek canon.

Yes, potentially they can royally **** this movie up. They could even make a good movie that isn't a very good Trek one (which would probably be even more irritating). But to throw around statements such as "This film is gonna suck" based on the very limited amount of info we have right now....

[knightstorm]

If you had bothered using that lump of matter between your ears I wouldn't have to repeat myself in saying that the uniform is not important as long as they don't make severe changes to cannon.

Oh, I see. We're going to be like that are we? Fair enough.

You're the one who called me melodramatic, and was overly sarcastic in your previous reply.

So, no mention of it not being important as long as severe changes to canon are not made. But what the hell, right? I mean, I ought to have been able to read your ******* mind....

No, I expected you to read the other post where I said that if the uniforms weren't on top of everything else, I wouldn't be concerned about them.

They're keeping a lid on the details. I see no reason to worry about their respect or (or lack of respect) for canon until we have rather more than tail fins on the nacelles and the style of the uniforms....

Look at it from my perspective.
1. I know what he wanted to do to superman, and am concerned he will give star trek the same treatment
2. The look they gave the enterprise leads me to believe they may be doing something more Flash Gordonesque
3. The decision to go with TOS type uniforms is an attempt to placate me, but the fact that they took so little care as to choose a style of uniform that is inappropriate for that era negates what they are saying.

[James Smith]

You're the one who called me melodramatic, and was overly sarcastic in your previous reply.

If I was "overly" sarcastic by saying that I thought you were being a tad melodramatic, then I apologise. Personally, I thought I was being rather restrained!

No, I expected you to read the other post where I said that if the uniforms weren't on top of everything else, I wouldn't be concerned about them.

What "everything else" though? Fins on the nacelles, the ship being built on the ground rather than in orbit.....and that's about it.

Look at it from my perspective.
1. I know what he wanted to do to superman, and am concerned he will give star trek the same treatment
2. The look they gave the enterprise leads me to believe they may be doing something more Flash Gordonesque
3. The decision to go with TOS type uniforms is an attempt to placate me, but the fact that they took so little care as to choose a style of uniform that is inappropriate for that era negates what they are saying.

I think you're reading way, way too much into the few pieces of info that we have right now. I think you're premature in saying that the movie will suck, even though I do grant you that the potential is certainly there.

[knightstorm]

No, I expected you to read the other post where I said that if the uniforms weren't on top of everything else, I wouldn't be concerned about them.

What "everything else" though? Fins on the nacelles, the ship being built on the ground rather than in orbit.....and that's about it.

That and the fact that I know what the producer/director wanted to do with superman.  And, I'm sorry if it bothers you but the shadow of that is going to hang over how I look at this film.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

Bridge looks unbelievably bad. Kirk is the way he is because of an abusive drunk uncle and in interviews the writers take the pocket books as an acceptable source to build on. 

[Lieutenant_Q]

The uniforms looks like an interesting cross between the NX era uniforms and the TOS uniforms.  I just wish there were a few pockets.

As for everything else.  The only thing released thus far that has me screaming is the Bridge.  Also Building the ship on a planet surface seems stupid, since the reason that JJ states it should be done is to "Balance" the warp nacelles, despite the fact that to "Balance" them they would have to be built in the exact same place, as the minor variations in the gravitational field on the planet surface would "Unbalance" them.  Best to do it in space so that the gravitational forces can be better controlled.

[James Smith]

That and the fact that I know what the producer/director wanted to do with superman.  And, I'm sorry if it bothers you but the shadow of that is going to hang over how I look at this film.

Well, like I said - while there is the potential for this to be screwed up, it hasn't necessarily been screwed up yet.

Eh, whatever. Look on the bright side, this film can't possibly be as bad as Nemesis....

[Corbomite]

For some reason, my favorite Trek film is The Motion Picture. Each time I watch it or even think about it, the more I like it. The novelization by Roddenberry is supposed to be better than the film, so I will give that a try.

I'm kind of like that with The Phantom Menace. I still hate Jar Jar and the kid, but I like that movie more and more everytime I see it.

[Corbomite]

As far as the "reboot" issue this quote is from page 2 of the linked article.


http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20233502,00.html?cnn=yes



"Transforming a defunct old property into a cool 21st-century event flick may seem like business as usual for Hollywood (e.g., Superman Returns, Batman Begins), but Trek presented Paramount and Abrams with a much heftier challenge: how to make this hunk of retro sci-fi cheese meaningful as mainstream entertainment, as relevant pop, as big business. ''Every studio in town is searching for these kinds of franchises, so it was important for us to reboot,'' says Brad Weston, Paramount's president of production. ''But we needed a clean, fresh take on this thing.''"

[knightstorm]

For some reason, my favorite Trek film is The Motion Picture. Each time I watch it or even think about it, the more I like it. The novelization by Roddenberry is supposed to be better than the film, so I will give that a try.

I'm kind of like that with The Phantom Menace. I still hate Jar Jar and the kid, but I like that movie more and more everytime I see it.

Didn't mind Jar Jar, after all Star Wars isn't meant to be taken as seriously, although I do think Lucas went a bit overboard with CGI characters.  I also think they killed off Darth Maul too early.  Besides, Jar Jar can't compare to the gay, purple, cross dressing hutt in The Clone Wars.

[knightstorm]

As far as the "reboot" issue this quote is from page 2 of the linked article.


http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20233502,00.html?cnn=yes



"Transforming a defunct old property into a cool 21st-century event flick may seem like business as usual for Hollywood (e.g., Superman Returns, Batman Begins), but Trek presented Paramount and Abrams with a much heftier challenge: how to make this hunk of retro sci-fi cheese meaningful as mainstream entertainment, as relevant pop, as big business. ''Every studio in town is searching for these kinds of franchises, so it was important for us to reboot,'' says Brad Weston, Paramount's president of production. ''But we needed a clean, fresh take on this thing.''"

as for it not being a reboot

http://trekmovie.com/2007/10/08/interview-orci-talks-casting-characters-canon-and-more/

TrekMovie.com: You guys have resisting labels for this film such as remake, reboot, etc….even prequel. Prequel has a pretty basic definition so what is wrong with calling it that?

Roberto Orci: But yet it is not entirely accurate. In some senses it is a prequel, but the word I would use, which is how Damon [Lindelof] describes it, is a re-invigoration or re-vitalization.

Then again, it could probably be that they are giving interviews aimed at different audiences and are slanting their statements to suit their targets.  After all, the writer of the article you posted doesn't seem to have a very high opinion of Star Trek.  I doubt he's ever seen one of the spinoffs.