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

Star Trek 2009

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Nov. 29 2010, 8:35 pm

Star Trek 2009 was hardly a one trick pony.
And if it was, well, the pony is young and can learn to do new tricks before growing into a fine young stallion.
Unlike TNG which was a beating a dead horse until it defecated a series of dreadful movie.

"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Nov. 29 2010, 8:54 pm

Quote: jamesspock1 @ Nov. 29 2010, 11:32 am

This Trek, if you can call it that, was made for a young crowd, I guess any teen would like it, but some of us like it more evolved, with a script that makes sense and is accurate. This movie is a joke.


Oh yeah, we've heard that joke that some of you are more evolved..so far you show no sign of any form of evolution beyond your wanting need for pointless technobabbling's and one dimensional characters disguised in equally uninspired stories pretending to deal with complex social issues, when in fact they did no such thing. All ended as it had started in TNG films.
Nothing ever happened, nothing ever changed all was always predictable.
Name a single thing in any of TNG films that changed or altered the futures of the characters in any way...hell, even Data's death at the end of the Nemesis mess had attached to it his return as if nothing happened and all would be the same once as they hit that darn reset button.

At least in a new reality the sky's the limit, any thing can happen as their future is unwritten.

In TNG films, they couldn't dare to change any thing that would effect their future in fear that it would change, what, the other spin off series?
Now theres a joke, and you fell for it.
Hahahaha.

"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Nov. 29 2010, 11:11 pm

Delete.

Ghostmojo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1826

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 2:59 am

Don't other board members also feel that the Kirk character has to be right? As he is SO central to Star Trek if he deviates from accepted type the whole thing collapses. The original (Shatner) Kirk as envisaged by Roddenberry was more urbane and stolid following GR's desire to model him upon Horatio Hornblower. This version of Kirk is barely recognisable. The James Dean analogy holds true. It seems a standard approach by Hollywood these days that your heroes have to start mean and with a huge chip on their shoulders, alienating everybody, before finally proving themselves. That in itself is a totally hackneyed and stereotyped device ...


 


 


42


to boldy go where no man has gone before

jamesspock1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 461

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 4:56 am

At least in a new reality the sky's the limit, any thing can happen as their future is unwritten


I hope so, cause nothing happened in this one, except for blowing planets and fighting.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 5:12 am

Quote: Ghostmojo @ Nov. 30 2010, 2:59 am

>

>Don't other board members also feel that the Kirk character has to be right? As he is SO central to Star Trek if he deviates from accepted type the whole thing collapses. The original (Shatner) Kirk as envisaged by Roddenberry was more urbane and stolid following GR's desire to model him upon Horatio Hornblower. This version of Kirk is barely recognisable. The James Dean analogy holds true. It seems a standard approach by Hollywood these days that your heroes have to start mean and with a huge chip on their shoulders, alienating everybody, before finally proving themselves. That in itself is a totally hackneyed and stereotyped device ...

>42

>
I think you lose the entire point of the film and of the character if this is the way you view it. Kirk in Star Trek 2009 was supposed to show a young man with great potential who had lost his way because he did not "grow up" the same way his Prime Universe counterpart did. Instead, he's wasted his life being an arrogant a$$. The story of Trek 2009 shows us the beginnings of that man's personal journey to discover the person he really can (should) be. It's all but spelled-out in the post-bar fight scene with Captain Pike. I think this makes a MUCH more interesting character than just making him a black-and-white good guy that is a hero and role model from day one. That's dull and unrealistic. It's much more entertaining and interesting to see the JOURNEY rather than start at the destination.


And, the fact of the matter is, BECAUSE it's entertaining is why it is used so much.


I never understand Star Trek fans who value "realism" over entertainment. Star Trek is fiction, my friends. It is designed to entertain. Too many Trek fans get caught up in the "yeah, but could you actually LIVE there?" game when they are analyzing the realism and consistency of things.


Consider that before you just dismiss what you see on the surface.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 5:16 am

Quote: Old Sapper @ Nov. 29 2010, 5:47 pm

Star Trek 2009 renewed my interest in all things 'Trek'. I have been a Trekkie since day one and have faithfuly watched every new series and every movie. After 43 years it was getting a little tedious; thank God for Star Trek 2009! I can not begin to describe all the positives this venture puts forward. A new begining; what a brilliant idea, from here on in everything can be new and interesting without someone pointing to some arcane item forty years ago and critizing a excellent piece of work. Bring on more more more!!!!!



I feel the same way...although I have only been Trekking for 32 years!

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 5:20 am

As for the re-imagining of Kirk,
Picard had a similar "what a punk
I was" start, from his Academy days.

AtoZ, it's a shame you don't appreciate
TNG, as much as I! Jonathan Frakes knew
how to bring out the best in the regular
cast and it was always great to see them
in action, one more time. NEMESIS wasn't
up to snuff though, you're right, there ...

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Nov. 30 2010, 10:57 pm

Quote: Ghostmojo @ Nov. 30 2010, 2:59 am

>The original (Shatner) Kirk as envisaged by Roddenberry was more urbane and stolid following GR's desire to model him upon Horatio Hornblower.
That was a seasoned 33 year old Kirk and beyond. Not a younger Kirk, and especially not a Kirk who grew up with the circumstances that this one did.  Vger23 does a better job of expanding on this though.


 

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Dec. 01 2010, 3:46 am

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Nov. 30 2010, 5:20 am

As for the re-imagining of Kirk, Picard had a similar "what a punk I was" start, from his Academy days. AtoZ, it's a shame you don't appreciate TNG, as much as I! Jonathan Frakes knew how to bring out the best in the regular cast and it was always great to see them in action, one more time. NEMESIS wasn't up to snuff though, you're right, there ...


Sorry, I am just never going to be a Frakes fan.
Not fond of him as an actor and not imprssed with his directing.
For the most part his directing is based on television series production methodology with little to no creative input or inventiveness...after all I haven't seen or heard of any studio offering him film projects.
Since your a fan, you might have heard of something...but I till wouldn't be impressed.

"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"

Jake Sisko

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 40

Report this Dec. 01 2010, 9:32 am

Quote: jamesspock1 @ Nov. 30 2010, 4:56 am

I hope so, cause nothing happened in this one, except for blowing planets and fighting


lol...i'll second that.

They’ve given away their humanity with this genetic manipulation… Many of the qualities that they breed out, the uncertainty, the self-discovery, the unknown, these are many of the qualities that make life worth living… well, at least to me. I wouldn’t want to live my life knowing that my future was written, that my boundaries had been already set. Would you? -Jean-Luc Picard

star trek tng
rocks!!!!!:)

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 38

Report this Dec. 01 2010, 5:48 pm

BOO HISS!!! i cant believe they made that! at least make on different and new characters or on a cast young enough to do a movie! dont try to remake tos!!!!!!!!!!!!!


"I've never met a chocolate I didn't like"-Deanna Troi

KelisThePoet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 636

Report this Dec. 02 2010, 11:50 am

Quote: Roboto @ Nov. 29 2010, 1:18 pm

>First of all, what happened in the series... well, happened. Time travel really messes with your brain, but understand this: no single movie can change what happened in the series, unless you decide to believe that it does. The biggest reason is because none of it is real, and the whole point is for personal entertainment. As far as I am concerned, the viewer can interpret it any way he wants. The idea of the movie is that it is supposed to be an alternate universe, so I just take comfort in that and think of the film as a whole separate Trek universe.


Sometimes, I wonder if the makers of the new Star Trek movie were thinking about the fictionality of the Star Trek universe. There is a way to "read" the movie as about its own production. The creators (and the readers/viewers) of a prequel automatically recreate or reimagine the fictional universe of that prequel's successors, just by engaging with the concept (a sequel actually works similarly). Now, the prequel can try to hide the fact that it is re-writing fictional history, as Enterprise does, or as the Star Wars prequels do. This kind of prequel (fictionally) represents a real world, elsewhere, the history of which is being reported out of order, not recreated. Star Trek 2009, by contrast, lays bare the device, by having Nero and Spock-prime re-write history within the story as Abrams and his collaborators re-write history through the story. The fictional time alterations mimic and metaphorize the real-world writing process.


If Star Trek 2009 is a movie about itself (and I admit, I might be stretching, to make the movie what I want it to be, as a viewer), then the quick, serendipitous assemblage of the Enterprise crew can be interpreted in a new way, not through the lenses of realism or improbability, but as a gesture to Trek continuity within the reimagination of Trek, an acknowledgement by the creators of this movie that the piece is a "reboot," but a "reboot" indebted to its roots.


There are so many gestures to continuity in Star Trek 2009 (despite the perception that the movie was made exclusively for non-Trekkies). The characters fall into their old roles. Quotes and situations from the old movies are repeated. All these continuity gestures are corny, as well as insufficient compensation for the changed time line, if we think of the Star Trek universe as a real place, or as a movie striving for realist representation. But viewed through another lens, these gestures reflect the movie's deliberate faithfulness to Trek, its commitment to the survival of the old within the new.


Falor was a prosperous merchant who went on a journey to gain greater awareness: Through storms he crossed the Voroth Sea/ To reach the clouded shores of Raal/ Where old T’Para offered truth./ He traveled through the windswept hills/ And crossed the barren Fire Plains/ To find the silent monks of Kir./ Still unfulfilled, he journeyed home/ Told stories of the lessons learned/ And gained true wisdom by the giving. – Falor’s Journey, “Innocence”

Lieutenant_Jedi

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1728

Report this Dec. 02 2010, 8:23 pm

Just one point that has to be established.

No matter how you feel about the new movie, the events taking place in it are an "alternate timeline" that exists completely separate from the timeline we all know and love.

"Can you detect midi - chlorians with a tricorder?"

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Dec. 03 2010, 6:51 am

Quote: AtoZ2 @ Dec. 01 2010, 3:46 am

Sorry, I am just never going to be a Frakes fan. Not fond of him as an actor and not imprssed with his directing. For the most part his directing is based on television series production methodology with little to no creative input or inventiveness...after all I haven't seen or heard of any studio offering him film projects. Since your a fan, you might have heard of something...but I till wouldn't be impressed.

What am I supposed to say to that, AtoZ?
You're right, of course, about there not
having been a non-TREK block-buster being
directed by the man. Never-the-less, he's
loved by the ladies, respected by the gents
and he's a good guy in a cut-throat industry ...

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