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

The destruction of Star Trek as we knew and loved it.

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 11:08 am

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Mar. 28 2013, 8:14 am

>

>I have seen some Fan-based STAR TREK projects and for all of
the hard-core enthusiasm and passion that these FANS have for the
franchise ... they have NO CLUE about writing scripts, staging scenes, 
cinematography, or artistry within a very limited budget. STAR TREK
Fan Films invariably end up looking bad and being predictably lame.

>


Truth. *still SMDH after watching ST: Of Gods and Men*


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

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 5:23 pm

Ha! Ha! Ha! Star Trek: Of Gods and Men is a TOP SHELF Fan-Made
movie! Even the best of STAR TREK's Second Banannas can't redeem
this genre. And what kills me the most is that there are fans who
aggrandize this pedestrian film-school project! What IS it, Treknoir?


Tell me: what is it that makes these fans put on their rose-colored glasses
for THIS kind of garbage? The SAME fans who will cry FOUL over whatever
license J.J. Abrams wants to take with REAL Star Trek movies - and nitpick
every perceived flaw, from the obvious (excessive Lens flares) to the obscure
(divergence from "canon"). It makes them look like a bunch of whackadoos ...


Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 7:43 pm

In China we see Star Trek on Web and see OMFG in 1960's they more see equality and everything we always want but not always know how express in 21st century; J.J.'s movies are Racist, Sexist, etc. in every way Original Trek was try fight the system of oppression; J.J. is part of that system of oppression

Mitchz95

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1830

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 8:27 pm

Quote: Lang-haoLeeyoh @ Apr. 01 2013, 7:43 pm

>

>J.J.'s movies are Racist, Sexist, etc. in every way Original Trek was try fight the system of oppression; J.J. is part of that system of oppression

>


Um ... how?


"The future is in the hands of those who explore... And from all the beauty they discover while crossing perpetually receding frontiers, they develop for nature and for humankind an infinite love." - Jacques Yves Cousteau

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 8:51 pm

Mitchz95 Re. J.J. he mainstream comercials and videos, working for mainstream biz that pay for political cmapaigns of people in office, n' thus are the USA as is, whereas TOS was fighting against USA as is trying to promote change.


Mitchz95 Re. Race They make fun of people who speak english as second language and for Asian-Americans likhy my family that #1 form of racism that we get on street.


Mitchz95 Re. Sexist Uhura sign to Billions of women they can be equals to men in work place and do that 1/2 century past; in J.J. she need affirmative action of Kirk, and having a relationship with her instructor to get position, that the chauvinistic attitude of the 1950's that even the beat generation fight against in 1950's over 1/2 century ago, and over half century ago Beatnicks see that as the evil side of politics re. women

guerototote

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 9:48 pm

I liked the 'reboot' do to the effects and possibilities it opens. What i feel needs to be done is that j.j. makes a couple more wounderful movies with kirks nemeses then make a final movie. they time warp with a group of vulcan survivers, led by old spock, back to stop the impact nero had on the universe because the federation falls to another race like romulans or borg due to the lack of vulcans and their science acadamy. Think about it. Vulcans are the technological back bone of the federation. Without them starfleet will be technologically challenged so to speek. Once the timeline is fixed the enterprise returns home the crew protected by some kinda tempral wake and kirk meets his father, spock his mother, wounderful tearful ending. THEN they make a new T.V. series that takes place 15 Years after voyager. Starfleet is now outfitted with next gen tech that voyager brought back with them. Now the borg are not such a threat. A new ship is made. Not a flag ship. No no this ship will be the MUSCLE of the federation. The protector against some new enemy that threatens EVERYONE in the alpha Quadrant. Something so scarry that species and technology unite to stop it, and the greedy borg from assimilating it. Lol. C. G. IS advanced enough to have more space battles and all in 1080p. :-) the best part would be that if its only 10 or 15 years from when voyager returned then they can have cast members from ds9, voy, and tng make suprise appearances which would make ALOT of true fans happy. enterprise did alot of exploring now its time for some action. Dont you think? Think about it, thats why the reboot got so many more new fans, the graphics and action scenes. Put some of that in a weekly tv show and you got some good ratings with LOTS of fans, old and new.

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 01 2013, 10:26 pm

guerototote If you have that strong opinion you should enter field; but special effects can be in any movie and all members of TOS and NTG always say "A Star Trek movie cannot be a movie that happens to be about Star Trek a Star Trek movie has to be A-STAR-TREK-MOVIE" n' best star trek episodes not even have many special effects and when special effects exist they there to support story.


 


If you want to see a great special effect extravaganza, then tell J.J. to make a feature length long advertisement  for an electronic razor and it will be much more special effect based as co. give as much money as he need; but tell him he soulless man; without a social conscious so, should stay out of sci-fi used to promote social change, cus' he is taking away the social change that would occur if someone else be in charge, and in many countries in world many people die for such change; and to take that away from them just as many % of ppl in this country who die around world for social change should be willing to sacrifice socioeconomic-political standing by opposing him taking that away from them.

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 12:15 am

Quote: Lang-haoLeeyoh @ Apr. 01 2013, 8:51 pm

>

>Mitchz95 Re. Sexist Uhura sign to Billions of women they can be equals to men in work place and do that 1/2 century past; in J.J. she need affirmative action of Kirk, and having a relationship with her instructor to get position, that the chauvinistic attitude of the 1950's that even the beat generation fight against in 1950's over 1/2 century ago, and over half century ago Beatnicks see that as the evil side of politics re. women

>


I don't recall that Uhura a) needed anything from Kirk in order to get her position -- in fact she pretty much outright refused him, or b) needed the relationship with Spock to get onto the Enterprise. Also, she had to challenge Spock directly since he was about to refuse her that position to which she would otherwise have been assigned without any issues whatever. She called him out. If she had really been unable to reach her professional goals without a boyfriend, then I would agree with you about it being chauvinist, but there was nothing to suggest that this was the case.


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

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 10:23 am

Quote: Lang-haoLeeyoh @ Apr. 01 2013, 8:51 pm

>

>Mitchz95 Re. J.J. he mainstream comercials and videos, working for mainstream biz that pay for political cmapaigns of people in office, n' thus are the USA as is, whereas TOS was fighting against USA as is trying to promote change.

>Mitchz95 Re. Race They make fun of people who speak english as second language and for Asian-Americans likhy my family that #1 form of racism that we get on street.

>Mitchz95 Re. Sexist Uhura sign to Billions of women they can be equals to men in work place and do that 1/2 century past; in J.J. she need affirmative action of Kirk, and having a relationship with her instructor to get position, that the chauvinistic attitude of the 1950's that even the beat generation fight against in 1950's over 1/2 century ago, and over half century ago Beatnicks see that as the evil side of politics re. women

>


TOS was actually about adventure and politics, so having the effects there driving the story is nothing new. Actually, Rodenberry's vision is fully on display in The Motion Picture, where the effects literally take up half the film. So, again, Abrams is not the first to rely on effects in a Star Trek movie to sell it.


As for chauvinism, Uhura didn't need any male to get where she did. As someone else pointed out, Uhura had to point out to Spock her qualifications to be on the Enterprise, and remind him that he needs to get over his own concern about favoritism and put her where her skills would have gotten her. In fact, some fans have argued against this film because Uhura demonstrates some skills she didn't have in TOS. So, Abrams actually empowered her more.


As for racism, Chekov's accent is a reference to TOS, because Chekov's Russian accent is not realistic. Even Koenig acknowledged that, and the actor whole played in 2009 Trek is Russian and can speak English flawlessly. So, its not racist-its a joke.


Also, if you think TOS fought against USA, watch The Omega Glory. Roddenberry wasn't always so anti-capitalist.

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 10:42 am

Quote: Ashtimus_Prime @ Mar. 31 2013, 6:12 pm

>Star Trek died in 2005 with the cancellation of Enterprise, a show that may not be popular, but as far as I'm concerned, was loyal to the franchise. I simply just disregard Abrams' films as non-canon, that way I don't cry myself to sleep.


Which is why it is in an alternate timeline, having no influence upon the Prime timeline. Just like the Mirror Universe.

Lady_K_Archer

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 12:03 pm

Quote: jeanluckirk737 @ Jan. 14 2013, 7:49 am

>

>Abrams admitted that he himself was a bigger  Star Wars fan then a Star Trek fan *me being sick*

>


 


That explains all the battle scenes and crap and the lack of a decent plot!  I am not against having new movies and/or shows, but the quality is total pants.  People tell me "stop crying like a baby over it.  You expect the original actors to play these recent roles?'  Actually no I don't.  But I will admit it is hard for me to see other actors play characters I have grown up on.  Why not introduce new characters or minor characters and draw from that?  I am all for trying to gain a new audience for Star Trek. That is what will keep it alive.  But these new movies have shallow plot lines and are all about blowing sh*t up and special  effects and really the bottom line is how much money can they bring in with the movies.  I understand that money makes the world go round but TOS managed to put out a good show in the 60s on a limited budget (yes I know that the special FX are not like what they are today) but the plot managed to be fun, creative, and enjoyable.  The whole Spock/Uhura thing just grinds my gears to no end. 


I've said what I wanted to say.  LLAP.

leroybrock

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 213

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 1:50 pm

Quote: Lady_K_Archer @ Apr. 02 2013, 12:03 pm

Quote: jeanluckirk737 @ Jan. 14 2013, 7:49 am

>

>

>Abrams admitted that he himself was a bigger  Star Wars fan then a Star Trek fan *me being sick*

>

 

That explains all the battle scenes and crap and the lack of a decent plot!  I am not against having new movies and/or shows, but the quality is total pants.  People tell me "stop crying like a baby over it.  You expect the original actors to play these recent roles?'  Actually no I don't.  But I will admit it is hard for me to see other actors play characters I have grown up on.  Why not introduce new characters or minor characters and draw from that?  I am all for trying to gain a new audience for Star Trek. That is what will keep it alive.  But these new movies have shallow plot lines and are all about blowing sh*t up and special  effects and really the bottom line is how much money can they bring in with the movies.  I understand that money makes the world go round but TOS managed to put out a good show in the 60s on a limited budget (yes I know that the special FX are not like what they are today) but the plot managed to be fun, creative, and enjoyable.  The whole Spock/Uhura thing just grinds my gears to no end. 

I've said what I wanted to say.  LLAP.


 


The delusion and ridiculous self-absorbtion of all the JJ haters and their rabid, mindless hatred of anything that they weren't personally consulted about before being made.would be adorable were it not so unbecoming in adults.


I Am Ultra Narcissus.

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 2:09 pm

Quote: leroybrock @ Apr. 02 2013, 1:50 pm

Quote: Lady_K_Archer @ Apr. 02 2013, 12:03 pm

Quote: jeanluckirk737 @ Jan. 14 2013, 7:49 am

>

>

>

>Abrams admitted that he himself was a bigger  Star Wars fan then a Star Trek fan *me being sick*

>

 

That explains all the battle scenes and crap and the lack of a decent plot!  I am not against having new movies and/or shows, but the quality is total pants.  People tell me "stop crying like a baby over it.  You expect the original actors to play these recent roles?'  Actually no I don't.  But I will admit it is hard for me to see other actors play characters I have grown up on.  Why not introduce new characters or minor characters and draw from that?  I am all for trying to gain a new audience for Star Trek. That is what will keep it alive.  But these new movies have shallow plot lines and are all about blowing sh*t up and special  effects and really the bottom line is how much money can they bring in with the movies.  I understand that money makes the world go round but TOS managed to put out a good show in the 60s on a limited budget (yes I know that the special FX are not like what they are today) but the plot managed to be fun, creative, and enjoyable.  The whole Spock/Uhura thing just grinds my gears to no end. 

I've said what I wanted to say.  LLAP.

 

The delusion and ridiculous self-absorbtion of all the JJ haters and their rabid, mindless hatred of anything that they weren't personally consulted about before being made.would be adorable were it not so unbecoming in adults.


You know, I think people might be on to something here. Star Trek was written in the 60's, in an attempt to show a more positive future that was relevant to the people of their times, but may not be relevant to our culture now, so any attempt to reboot it are futile.


Again, I don't think the plot of Trek 09 is shallow, unless the audience goes in expecting it to be shallow. That might be the problem of TOS versus Trek 09-cultural expectations. TOS was billed as an action adventure with political subtext but people nowadays go to it as political commentary rather than action. Modern movies, in contrast, are expected to be action/adventure with little to no subtext, which means if there is actual subtext to the movie, it is missed.


So, I think that Trek 09 is irrelevant to the series and that Star Trek, while interesting cultural phenomenon for its time, is probably passing away. It might be time too

Mitchz95

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1830

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 3:18 pm

Quote: fireproof78 @ Apr. 02 2013, 2:09 pm

>

>Star Trek, while interesting cultural phenomenon for its time, is probably passing away. It might be time too

>


I don't know if I agree with that. While today's audiences generally prefer dumbed-down reality shows and the like, there is still a niche for good old science fiction. I think a new series that combines the best of both worlds - action/adventure for the aforementioned modern audiences, and some intelligent and thought-provoking stories for anyone who wants them - would go a long way.


"The future is in the hands of those who explore... And from all the beauty they discover while crossing perpetually receding frontiers, they develop for nature and for humankind an infinite love." - Jacques Yves Cousteau

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 3:24 pm

Quote: Mitchz95 @ Apr. 02 2013, 3:18 pm

Quote: fireproof78 @ Apr. 02 2013, 2:09 pm

>

>

>Star Trek, while interesting cultural phenomenon for its time, is probably passing away. It might be time too

>

I don't know if I agree with that. While today's audiences generally prefer dumbed-down reality shows and the like, there is still a niche for good old science fiction. I think a new series that combines the best of both worlds - action/adventure for the aforementioned modern audiences, and some intelligent and thought-provoking stories for anyone who wants them - would go a long way.


I would heartily agree with this sentiment and I really don't wish Star Trek ill. But, it seems fans expect Star Trek to be confined to a specific formula and to deviate from it is to risk alienating the fan base. The response that "Trek 09 isn't my Star Trek" or "It's just action with no plot" indicate to me that the willingness to engage a Star Trek movie in the same way that the TV shows are engaged. And if a movie is treated so flippantly, why would a TV show fair better?

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: DS9_FOREVER!

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