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

New Star Trek movie right direction or do you wish it stayed in Prime Universe?

Report this
Created by: picard_2305

picard_2305

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 168

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 8:17 am

Only doing this to see how fan base has divided over this movie.

Trekwolf164

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 32043

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 8:23 am

I see many Parallels between TMP and XI


I think the next installment will be telling


 

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 11:06 am

Right direction. A major change was necessary. Hopefully, the next two movies will be equally good. Or at least two out of three. Otherwise, it may negatively impact the franchise. I would like to see another series one day and I think the success of the movies will play a big part in that decision.


It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want. - Spock

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 11:12 am

It was a wise move.


 

UncommonOtaku

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 26

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 12:14 pm

Its been three years now, . . . so its pretty obvious that it was a bad choice.


JJ got too carried away by killing off too many elements in the name of creativity.  Unwise spur of the moment decisions.  Is what killed the franchise.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 6:50 pm

Quote: picard_2305 @ Feb. 26 2011, 8:17 am

>

>Only doing this to see how fan base has divided over this movie.

>


Prime Timeline = Declining ratings for 14 years and turning out less than stellar reviews.


New movie = Most successful Trek in years and actually enjoyable according to most people.


Tough question...

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 6:51 pm

Quote: UncommonOtaku @ Feb. 26 2011, 12:14 pm

>

>Its been three years now, . . . so its pretty obvious that it was a bad choice.

>JJ got too carried away by killing off too many elements in the name of creativity.  Unwise spur of the moment decisions.  Is what killed the franchise.

>


Incorrect.

captain saavik

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 854

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 7:57 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>I would have liked more episodes of TOS with the original cast.

>But that was never going to happen. People have passed on and got older.

>Same with the cast of TNG and VOY and DS9.

>


So tru SF however I say it was a bad move they destroied Vulcan the one place in the universe for peace and they kill millions of vulcans in the process definatly a BAD move.


CaptainMauin

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2511

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 8:04 pm

I would have preferred it if they would have kept Vulcan whole instead of destroying it. Destroying Vulcan was, in my opinion, a bad move. I prefer the Prime universe that had the lower ratings over the new movie.


Besides that, I felt that the new movie was more of a comedy in space or an ordinary action movie. For some reason, it didn't feel like Star Trek too me.


Goodbye. I am gone.

coastcityo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 601

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 8:34 pm

I have no problem with destroying Vulcan if it had been "for real", but it doesn't really count since they used time travel to make it happen before TOS and just created another parallel universe. Instead of being something important, it just becomes a cheap trick, and easily ignored. They should have set the movie in a future after DS9/Voy if they really wanted to take a chance on a bold new direction, and then they would have had the freedom to do what they wanted, and it would have mattered. As it is, they created a movie that has upset all the old fogies like myself, a fan who loves DS9 as his favorite series because they took chances, and did not satisfy a single fan I know of. The one person I know who seems to think it was a good choice to make such a bold change, has since changed his mind after realizing he doesn't ever need to see the film again beyond the opening, but only after trying to watch it a second time and turning it off before Kirk could drive a car off a cliff. And this is the guy who liked the film.

Jason222

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 715

Report this Feb. 26 2011, 9:18 pm

I think long run be helpful keep star Terk alive speical if they change date major events main timeline want.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Feb. 27 2011, 12:59 am

I would have preferred it if they would have kept Vulcan whole instead of destroying it. Destroying Vulcan was, in my opinion, a bad move.


Considering that most of you probably didn't care about Vulcan before, I don't see the big deal here.  The only significance Vulcan played after TOS was that it was the setting for the end of Star Trek 3 and early Star Trek 4.  Honestly, were there a lot of memorable episodes that fans clamored for having to do with Vulcan after that?  No.  Was there some sort of great demand for Vulcan episodes afterwards?  No.


For some reason, it didn't feel like Star Trek too me.


Too well made and too well liked probably.

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Feb. 27 2011, 1:03 am

I have no problem with destroying Vulcan if it had been "for real", but it doesn't really count since they used time travel to make it happen before TOS and just created another parallel universe. Instead of being something important, it just becomes a cheap trick, and easily ignored. They should have set the movie in a future after DS9/Voy if they really wanted to take a chance on a bold new direction, and then they would have had the freedom to do what they wanted, and it would have mattered. As it is, they created a movie that has upset all the old fogies like myself, a fan who loves DS9 as his favorite series because they took chances, and did not satisfy a single fan I know of. The one person I know who seems to think it was a good choice to make such a bold change, has since changed his mind after realizing he doesn't ever need to see the film again beyond the opening, but only after trying to watch it a second time and turning it off before Kirk could drive a car off a cliff. And this is the guy who liked the film.


Yeah, that's right.  Absolutely no one likes this film!   Also, obviously they went the wrong route with this film since Deep Space Nine and Voyager's constantly skyrocketing ratings as well as TNG's constant box office smashes have proven that people are hungry for that era of stories!  Just what were they thinking?

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Feb. 27 2011, 3:32 am

Quote: UncommonOtaku @ Feb. 26 2011, 12:14 pm

>

>Its been three years now, . . . so its pretty obvious that it was a bad choice.

>JJ got too carried away by killing off too many elements in the name of creativity.  Unwise spur of the moment decisions.  Is what killed the franchise.

>


you are aware that the 1st draft of the script will be compleed soon and the studio will be able to set budget & JJ will decide if he's directoring (I HOPE SO) again.


http://trekmovie.com/2011/02/21/orci-lindelof-holed-up-in-hotel-writing-star-trek-sequel-want-fan-input-on-enterprise-array-naming/


Sorry, nothing on this planet works according to your schedule. the sun will still rise regaurdless of your likes and dislikes and people will flock to the next film, hard core fans included.


"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"

picard_2305

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 168

Report this Feb. 27 2011, 3:37 am

Quote: WkdYngMan @ Feb. 27 2011, 12:59 am

>

>I would have preferred it if they would have kept Vulcan whole instead of destroying it. Destroying Vulcan was, in my opinion, a bad move.

>Considering that most of you probably didn't care about Vulcan before, I don't see the big deal here.  The only significance Vulcan played after TOS was that it was the setting for the end of Star Trek 3 and early Star Trek 4.  Honestly, were there a lot of memorable episodes that fans clamored for having to do with Vulcan after that?  No.  Was there some sort of great demand for Vulcan episodes afterwards?  No.

>For some reason, it didn't feel like Star Trek too me.

>Too well made and too well liked probably.

>


 


Are you implying that the new movie is the only Star Trek that can actually be enjoyed?


 


Who am I to argue with the captain of the Enterprise?

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