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

star trek 2009,do you like it

Report this
Created by: porthos432

dawgweenr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Apr. 15 2012, 5:50 pm

Okay man ...THAT is in no way insulting! I absolutely love TROK k, have it dvrd and wife on my ass to delete it. I'm sayin here on just my 2nd post that technology today will always make these remakes more realistic and eye catching. I'm not a trekkie, k...just really jacked about the updated version of "KAAHHHNNN "!! U know they will thro all the great lines in from the classic! "Buried alive, buried alive "...."Kaahhnn Kaahhnn!!!! " Who plays Paul Winfields part? Can't wait! "THIS! IS SETI ALPHA FIVE!! "

GET SOME!

1randomredshirt

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 19

Report this Apr. 18 2012, 1:35 pm

The Star Trek 2009 movie was a great movie. I saw it in theaters twice, because it was too confusing the first time I saw it. The graphics in it are super cool. I can't wait to see the next movie this year....


The wonderful thing about tribbles is tribbles are wonderful things

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 20 2012, 9:46 pm

Quote: dawgweenr @ Apr. 15 2012, 5:50 pm

>Okay man ...THAT is in no way insulting! I absolutely love TROK k, have it dvrd and wife on my ass to delete it. I'm sayin here on just my 2nd post that technology today will always make these remakes more realistic and eye catching. I'm not a trekkie, k...just really jacked about the updated version of "KAAHHHNNN "!! U know they will thro all the great lines in from the classic! "Buried alive, buried alive "...."Kaahhnn Kaahhnn!!!! " Who plays Paul Winfields part? Can't wait! "THIS! IS SETI ALPHA FIVE!! "


Hate to ruin your day, chief...but they arenot remaking Wrath of Khan. At all. 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Apr. 20 2012, 11:50 pm

Also, I mentioned in another thread once that with Kirk for instance, can have someone with the same build as William Shatner doing the acting. Then his head is replaced with that of William Shatner's as Kirk from stock cells, or individual scenes, from the TOS days. The voice can also be dubbed over with one sounding like his, or parts put together from then. These can be done, with modern filming techniques. But I guess would be too complicated and time consuming. So, just have to get used to the film.


You could I suppose but what actor would want their face and voice (ie -- the key aspects of their acting??) to be covered up with the voice and face of someone else? The CG job they did on Patrick Stewart's face in Wolverine was pretty damn creepy and unnatural. I can see why they opted for real actors, from a practical and artistic standpoint; and totally believe that this was the right decision.





I'm also into Astrology. So, if the film makers also were, can be a case of actors with typical sun signs corresponding well to the main characters. For instance a typical Aries being Kirk, a typical Cancerian being McCoy, and a typical Aquarius being Spock (with a moonsign (what we are on the inside) being a water sign, i.e. Cancer, Scorpio or Pisces). Scotty I'm not sure about, perhaps a Gemini.


Bit of an esoteric interpretation there -- I suppose if you could back it up, you could argue it, although if that were the director / writers' intentions, wouldn't they have said so by now? I like astrology too but I would be more inclined to think of their characters in terms of differing personality types.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

startrekwiegs2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 22

Report this Apr. 25 2012, 3:06 pm

I think it was really good. They ending was good, but they should NOT have destroyed Vulcan

kirk is my favorite

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Apr. 26 2012, 5:39 pm

I liked it. At first I was like wait what is going on. Then I got it

When I grow up I want to join Starfleet.

Welena

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 50

Report this Apr. 26 2012, 6:34 pm

I really like the 2009 movie.  I am looking forward to the new movie.

dawgweenr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Apr. 27 2012, 12:11 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Apr. 20 2012, 9:46 pm

Quote: dawgweenr @ Apr. 15 2012, 5:50 pm

>Okay man ...THAT is in no way insulting! I absolutely love TROK k, have it dvrd and wife on my ass to delete it. I'm sayin here on just my 2nd post that technology today will always make these remakes more realistic and eye catching. I'm not a trekkie, k...just really jacked about the updated version of "KAAHHHNNN "!! U know they will thro all the great lines in from the classic! "Buried alive, buried alive "...."Kaahhnn Kaahhnn!!!! " Who plays Paul Winfields part? Can't wait! "THIS! IS SETI ALPHA FIVE!! "

Hate to ruin your day, chief...but they arenot remaking Wrath of Khan. At all. 


GET SOME!

dawgweenr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Apr. 27 2012, 12:13 am

I wanna tell who ever the hell called me chief, they r remaking it ...why wouldn't they remake the best star trek movie, ever.! We'll see queer

___Lucifer___

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1142

Report this Apr. 27 2012, 12:26 am

No dawg, they're not remaking TWOK. Abrams has already stated publicly that the Star Trek sequel will NOT be a remake.


Another reason against the remake is that the authors of the original story (Bennett, Sowards, Peeples and Meyer) would be entitled to royalties that Paramount is not willing to pay out.


Blockman

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 520

Report this Apr. 27 2012, 4:00 pm

Quote: OtakuJo @ Apr. 20 2012, 11:50 pm

>

>Also, I mentioned in another thread once that with Kirk for instance, can have someone with the same build as William Shatner doing the acting. Then his head is replaced with that of William Shatner's as Kirk from stock cells, or individual scenes, from the TOS days. The voice can also be dubbed over with one sounding like his, or parts put together from then. These can be done, with modern filming techniques. But I guess would be too complicated and time consuming. So, just have to get used to the film.

>You could I suppose but what actor would want their face and voice (ie -- the key aspects of their acting??) to be covered up with the voice and face of someone else? The CG job they did on Patrick Stewart's face in Wolverine was pretty damn creepy and unnatural. I can see why they opted for real actors, from a practical and artistic standpoint; and totally believe that this was the right decision.

>

>I'm also into Astrology. So, if the film makers also were, can be a case of actors with typical sun signs corresponding well to the main characters. For instance a typical Aries being Kirk, a typical Cancerian being McCoy, and a typical Aquarius being Spock (with a moonsign (what we are on the inside) being a water sign, i.e. Cancer, Scorpio or Pisces). Scotty I'm not sure about, perhaps a Gemini.

>Bit of an esoteric interpretation there -- I suppose if you could back it up, you could argue it, although if that were the director / writers' intentions, wouldn't they have said so by now? I like astrology too but I would be more inclined to think of their characters in terms of differing personality types.

>


Going as far as keeping the astrological signs of the characters the same as the actors seems a bit hard. Not even all the Bonds had the same hair color between eachother.


dawgweenr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Apr. 28 2012, 10:25 am

Not remaking TWOK!?? WTFF! Thanks, I'm totally bummed by that ...

dawgweenr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this Apr. 28 2012, 7:05 pm

It's about money?!? Seriously, Abrams can't do this! Maybe the timeline is wrong, cause TWOK is supposed to be set when Kirk is an admiral ...f*#ckin sux!!

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