ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info



GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Aug. 11 2009, 12:20 am

Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ Aug. 10 2009, 8:44 pm)
Quote (DammitJim6200 @ Aug. 10 2009, 5:41 pm)
Quote (kanig8 @ Aug. 01 2009, 3:36 am)
Hello everyone!

What do you think would have been Gene Roddenberry's opinion of STAR TREK XI, if he had still been alive to see it?

What would he think ? what do people normally think about CRAP ? They hate it,
Roddenberry once said one day he hope some one would make a Star Trek that makes his look like nothing,
that person is not JJ Abrams,
"NOTHING" is how I describe JJ Abrams HORRIBLE, DOPEY UGLY MOVIE of Fundamental STUPIDITY,
That new Star Trek is like all of Jar Jar Abrams' other movies,
a bunch of retards running around screaming at each other for no reason,

I don't think Roddenberry will even let this crap see the light of day, like me, great minds think alike,
and if I hear "wictor" "wictor" AGAIN, I'll smash the screen it's playing on..... ?

DJ The reality is this:

All G.R. cared about were two things, money and more money(and the occassional hot babe on the side)

Before you go cussing and screaming remember I actually knew the man threw my grandfather's working with him among other aspects.

I would say something in response to DJ but I don't want to pile on the beat down his post has coming.


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Aug. 11 2009, 9:11 am

Quote (DammitJim6200 @ Aug. 10 2009, 8:41 pm)
and if I hear "wictor" "wictor" AGAIN, I'll smash the screen it's playing on..... ?[/b] :bored:

Then maybe you should stop watching it.

I don't know...seems to make sense to me...



GROUP: Members


Report this Aug. 19 2009, 7:45 pm

Quote (Ali88 @ Aug. 02 2009, 3:00 pm)
I don't think he would have liked it much

He probably would have said "The movie is my vision for the future... gone wrong"

I don't think he would have liked it being set in an alternative timeline and the fact that the alternative timeline is left unrestored

The original Star Trek series was about the TOS crew exploring the universe whereas the new movie is about the TOS crew stopping some Romulan from destroying planets.

Their is a clip of him I think on the first season next gen DVD where he said the network were interested in a series about cadets (I can't remember if it was Kirk and co as cadets or a new crew) but his response was the show is about the future so moving backwards from what has already been done would be a mistake, and before someone else says yeah but Enterprise did this yes he probably would have held the same view.


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Aug. 19 2009, 8:09 pm

Ironically, it was Roddenberry who first touted the idea of a Kirk-Prequel and showing how the original crew came together. Then in the 1980s went on to condone a recast of the original crew saying he hopes they say "Tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generation."


GROUP: Members

POSTS: 387

Report this Aug. 22 2009, 11:00 am

I really believe Gene would have liked the new movie, and embrace the recast. Movies unlike TV shows have to fit and appeal to the time period they are shown. We are in a period of time where sci-fi movies are ampped up with action, and special effects.. as compared with earlier period movies and Gene is after all a guy who understood the times he lives in. Gene would not have been able to make a movie as successful as this one, however, I think he could make a better TV series..

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum