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

Star Trek the Movie

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Nov. 02 2012, 5:59 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>I want the Kirk-Spock-McCoy dynamic. I don't want the next movie to be a Spock- Uhura romance. I don't care if its in it - I don't want it to be about it.

>


Yeah. I honestly think (or hope) that they probably will have more of Kirk/Spock/McCoy in the next movie -- a lot of that dynamic depends quite strongly on them being long-time acquaintances, whereas in the first movie they were just meeting. We saw hints of that pattern in the first movie. It might have been a little unrealistic for them to fall straight into that established banter. But now that they will have known each other a little longer, I really do think they can explore a more familiar relationship between those three.


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

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this Nov. 07 2012, 10:00 am

Quote: Jeffe525 @ Nov. 01 2012, 8:08 pm

>

>Now lets be honest with ourselves. If you look up the word "Continuity" in the encyclopedia, you're not likely to see a picture from Abrams Trek. But then, Star trek has never really won any awards in Continuity. That's what happpens when you build off of a 3-season series produced 55 years ago when no one took it very seriously.

>Real Trekkers know and ACCEPT this. Its just one of the quirks of Star Trek; something that was unavoidable as the universe evolved.

>In Abrams defense: The movie did a fine job explaining that the characters realized and accepted that their histories had been changed by time travel. This is not a concept unique (or even original) to ST, and non-Trekkers aren't idiots; I'm sure they won't get lost.

>The movie also satisfactorily explained Vucan tradition. Remember, we are talking about a 2-hour movie here, not a 25-hour season; I think they blended in the background very well in the time they had, all while not letting the audience fall asleep.

>The CG, set design, characters, score, the directing and acting... it was all top rate. I was very proud of Paramount for finally giving Trek the investment it needed to really shine.

>The plot is a different story, however. Speaking as a life-long Trek fan, I can honestly say that if you want to reboot the Trek universe... then just do it. Forget about time paradox's or alternate universes. Just reboot the series and let the fans deal with it.

>Face it, those fans are going to complain about something anyway - probably best if we can get them all to complain about the same thing. Give them some credit on their old ST Tech Manuals if they want to trade them in for a revised version. That will make them feel better.

>By the way - to those who say that this movie sucked, along with the last few movies, and the last few series too... Dude, what are you doing on this forum? How can you be a Star Trek fan if you hate everything Star Trek created in the last 15 years?

>


My work here is done. Thank you, Jeffe.


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

randy kerr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 425

Report this Nov. 07 2012, 2:52 pm

they need to stick with the tos story.

Blockman

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 520

Report this Nov. 12 2012, 7:46 pm

Quote: Jeffe525 @ Nov. 01 2012, 11:08 pm


--------------



If you looked up JJ Abrams in the dictionary you'd probably wind up Lost.

ba-doom, tishh!


Dobie619

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2

Report this Nov. 13 2012, 8:32 am

I don't remember the series, but one time travel story had " The Law of Conservation of Reality"  With this, you could go back and kill your grandfather before you were conceived, your grandmother would marry another and you would be born and do all the important things you were to do, just under a different name.  With this storyline, the timeline would heal itself through some natural force.  I am not sure how well this would work if you gave Adolf Hitler the hydrogen bomb or 300 Spartans 300 AK 47's, but i was willing to accept it as an answer to accidental minor changes inadvertently cause by time travelers.  I liked it better than the "Butterfly Effect" and about as well as  "A Sound of Thunder".  Admittedly there will always be changes ( Just what happened with the person who was going to buy the vacuum tubes in " City on the Edge of Forever"?)(or the families of the whaler in "Star Trek IV" when they came back short 2 whales?) So the changes to the new Star Trek are within canon, and Spock (Nimoy) returning to the " City on the Edge of Forever" and asking to be sent to his own timeline to correct the problem that caused the temporal split would be reasonable also. . As for the differences between the original timeline and new, I would suspect that being as soundly defeated (USS Kelvin)would put Starfleet on a serious war footing and change many things.  I am more disturbed by Cadet Kirk becoming Captain so soon.  When I was in the Marine Corps, we had a rank structure and someone senior to Kirk would have told him to " Stand aside Sonny, Let the real Officers handle it"

NCC-1873

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27

Report this Nov. 13 2012, 10:13 pm

While yes the timeline has been disrupted before, usually it was rectified within a short period of time whereas this time the disruption happened 25 years before the Enterprise existed. If Spock (prime) went to the Guardian and travelled into the future to save Romulus then you have new problems like Checkov is 12 yrs younger than Kirk but in jj land he's only 8 yrs younger. Also if the timeline was restored then at 25 Kirk would most likely be on the Farragut. Simple fact is the timeline will not be changed "back" because the reboot will turn into a remake. The whole idea of the alternate  timeline was to bring new stories without having the restrictions of the Star Trek canon. I personally felt I was watching Star Wars rather than Star Trek. Pines Kirk was too much like Han Solo to me. BTW why is the bridge state of the art yet engineering seemed more antiquated than the one from TOS. Sorry a brewery does not make a convincing engine room aboard a 23rd century starship. 


p.s. To whom it may concern just because someone didnt like this movie or any other trek in the past 15 yrs doesnt give you the right to tell them they shouldnt be on this board... I hate to state the obvious but Trek has been out for 46 yrs and this board reflects that...not just the past 15 yrs

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Nov. 13 2012, 10:36 pm

Quote: mario.aragona @ Nov. 01 2012, 7:27 pm

>

>Ok you are all telling me that its an alternate time line. ok so explain to me the even the smallest detail like spocks insigna was wrong? Can anyone answer that??????

>


Why was Spock's insignia "wrong" in an alternate universe?


That's easy to explain.


Look.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_64itAtqJIlY/TOxO1rdQloI/AAAAAAAAHNk/GPtXXjhgauo/s400/Star%2BTrek%2Bmirror%2Buniverse.jpg


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

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 14 2012, 4:44 am

Quote: OtakuJo @ Nov. 13 2012, 10:36 pm

Quote: mario.aragona @ Nov. 01 2012, 7:27 pm

>

>

>Ok you are all telling me that its an alternate time line. ok so explain to me the even the smallest detail like spocks insigna was wrong? Can anyone answer that??????

>

 

Why was Spock's insignia "wrong" in an alternate universe?

That's easy to explain.

Look.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_64itAtqJIlY/TOxO1rdQloI/AAAAAAAAHNk/GPtXXjhgauo/s400/Star%2BTrek%2Bmirror%2Buniverse.jpg


 


Why is it that people still don't "get" this 3.5 years after the freaking movie has come out? I got it in the first 30 minutes.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Fleet Admiral Braxton

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 288

Report this Nov. 14 2012, 3:23 pm

Quote: mario.aragona @ Oct. 31 2012, 3:21 pm

>

>I finally watched the movie for a second time. I couldn't bring my selfe to watch for so long because i really felt that just what i saw from the trailer i was upset. Well I finally gave it a chance and my suspisions were right.

>I felt there was no continuity. Those die hard fans of the oritinal series know that for example Spocks mother didn't die, she appeared in "jurney to Bable"  Vulcon wasn't distroyed and Uhura and spock didn't have a thing prior to the series. How can we fans accept this film as a part of STARTREK lore??? Can someone help me understand this.

>
Apperantly,You need a Dictionary to help With Your spelling; And Also,Don't be Down On Something Because It's Not What you Expect. As Long as It's "Based On STAR TREK Created By GENE RODDENBERRY"  Revisions Really Don't hurt All that Much As Long As You keep the Core In Place.

ColLovok

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 22

Report this Nov. 15 2012, 2:06 pm

IMO the 2009 JJ Abrams flick was above average (compared to the 4 Next Gen flicks and the 6 Classic Trek flicks). In my top 3 with Wrath of Khan and 1st Contact.


To answer the original post: It's an "Alternate Timeline" everything has changed.

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this Nov. 19 2012, 10:43 am

How does the new movie "destroy" anything that went before? Did JJ Abrams come round to your house and repossess your DVDs? Because I've still got mine, and nothing's been changed. You can still buy books and comics set in the original timeline.


Before the movie came out I was hoping they'd actually just start over and not bother connecting it to previous canon at all. That probably would have caused an even bigger uproar, since we wouldn't have the "alternate universe" explanation to placate us. As it is I only had a couple problems with the new movie:


1. Chris Pine


2. Beastie Boys


3. Budweiser Classic...apparently brewed in the Enterprise engine room


There are plenty of other possible complaints about the movie, the least of which is the way it relates to Star Trek continuity.

scottjimenez

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 329

Report this Nov. 20 2012, 3:32 pm

there should have been a Voyager movie

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 21 2012, 7:15 am

Quote: scottjimenez @ Nov. 20 2012, 3:32 pm

>

>there should have been a Voyager movie

>


 


No.


 


Not every series is entitied to a movie just because TOS and TNG got one. Voyager was a mediocre show, even by the judgement of the hardcore fans. And, the story ENDED. 


A Voyager movie would have failed more miserably than Nemesis.


 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Somniac

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 462

Report this Dec. 02 2012, 12:33 am

Yes.

Somniac

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 462

Report this Dec. 02 2012, 12:36 am

I'm so glad the original timeline still exists!!


Can someone tell me where I can see it please?


 

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: wissa, wissa, FleetAdmiral_BamBam

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