Comments on: New Star Trek Movie Plot Details

By: Soothsayer

Soothsayer — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 02:22:30 +0000

What’s the big spoiler that you won’t reveal? Is it about Vulcan being destroyed?

By: 790

790 — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:58:06 +0000

Yeah Jerry.
One big prob with recasting Kirk and Spock is that it will be difficult to capture the same feel since shatner and nimoy were those characters.
I’m totally with you Jerry that paramount should have gone forward with a next gen tv series. !!

By: Jerry

Jerry — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:40:16 +0000

I guess my point was a little more wide-sweeping than just Nemesis. I was referring to TV and movies both. Plus, even the original series has been knocked by some for its cheesy costumes, bad sfx, and the naivety of no war or hunger, etc. Not my opinion, but it’s out there. I suppose the only thing I think we should worry about is other actors portraying Kirk, Spock, etc. That could bomb. Or it could rock: how many James Bonds have there been? Or Dr. Whos? Anyway, personally, I’d rather have a Next Generation-caliber TV series than a movie, but that’s just me.

By: Bill

Bill — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:24:51 +0000

The lackluster & depressing Nemesis is as horrible as you’ve heard. That’s why you’ve heard so many people say that it’s horrible.

When you treat intelligent fans like they are stupid, you lose the fans. But it’s been said better – just look at the sad comments about Nemesis on Amazon.com.

Need I remind you that Nemesis was not the success that previous ST movies were? As a matter of fact, the studio was embarrassed to admit that Nemesis barely broke even. Based upon it’s meager profits, it wasn’t even worth making.

Why did it do so poorly? Before the Original Series faithful rely more on word-of-mouth than studio marketing. Also, need I remind you that there are many Star Trek fans amougst the popular movie reviewers.

But Nemesis was more than that – it was a warning to Paramount to not take Trek fans for granted. It absolutely proves beyond any doubt that some Trek is NOT better than any Trek. Nemesis proved that reruns of the original series were better than “any Trek”.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:55:10 +0000

I’m always a little confused to hear the belly-aching regarding Trek not being as good as it used to be. With the exception of Voyager, the TV shows all range from great to at least decent. I haven’t seen Nemesis, but I can’t believe it’s as horrible as I’ve heard. (I have it on DVD, just haven’t watched it, been busy sifting through the FIVE DISC! set of Blade Runner I got recently) Some Trek is better than no Trek. Yeah, time travel has been done, alt-universes and having cameos from anyone who’s ever been on the show have been, too. But like they said on South Park, there’s not that much that’s original anymore. If you dig deep enough, somebody’s already done it. So just chill and enjoy the ride. The teaser trailer gave me goosebumps when Nimoy’s voiceover started right when the camera came over the front of the saucer section under construction. Trust me, if Nimoy is cool with the script, we will be, too.

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:03:00 +0000

The TNG crew was already given their last hurrah. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Paramount treated Trek fans with respect?

ZAR said “Why not tell it plain and simple: HOW the first mission of the Enterprise NCC-1701 got together?”

Personally, I think it’s a done deal that if Paramount made the OPTIMISTIC film that ZAR suggests, it would be the smash hit of the year.

But this whole “alternate timelines” thing has me worried because it opens the door for Paramount to rationalize violating Star Trek’s optimistic cannon and treat Trek fans like idiots. Look, the possibility of an all-out Warship Enterprise is a frightening example of a horrible misinterpretation of what Star Trek was all about – Roddenberry was always FIERCELY ADAMANT about not turning the Star Trek series into some kind of space wars because that violated the basic optimism and premise of the show.

Even in the original series episode “Mirror, Mirror”, Kirk finds a way in the dark mirror universe to outsmart the mirror Enterprise crew – and at the end makes an impassioned plea for non-violence to mirror Spock that, to me, typifies the optimism and hand-of-friendship that made the series so beloved by millions – that intelligence beats violence.

It took a lot of skill, experience, and OPTIMISM to write the original Star Trek series. and with the dark, pessimistic dramas I see coming out of Paramount these days, I sometimes wonder if they are capable of that skill.

I think that when Roddenberry died, Paramount’s subsequent changes in the franchise forced the series to die an ignoble death.

Or as Bones would say, “You know Paramount, they LOVE to change things”

By: Ed

Ed — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:42:33 +0000

Awesome, I predicted the movie would use an alternate timeline/universe from the beginning. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to give the TNG crew one last hurrah while still spawning an all new Star Trek?

By: steve adams

steve adams — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:41:24 +0000

Sorry Andy, yesterday was Super Tuesday and I was getting very frustrated last night….. Didn’t mean to get hostile with ya.
^
Sorry Vic, when I read a post about somehow getting shat in the new trek film I usually react this way.
And btw he dosnt write his own books.(Allways has a co-author or ghost writer).
^
Yes!! I own Free Enterprise “the extended 2 disc edtion”. (What kind of geek to you think I am? I’m hardcore geek!).
Some call me Geek/squared. Heehee
^
Not to continue my shat-attack, but if you watch the documentaries on making the film Free Enterprise, the Directors had to give Shatner COMPLETE script control this after begging him for months and telling him that it would be good for his career. (He hated the idea at first). Check the bonus features!!!
^
That kinda thing gets around this town fast.
^
Free Enterprise couldn’t have worked without Shatner, but the New Star Trek film can.
^
Not bashing the guy just stating the facts….
^
Ok Shat-attack over…..
^
Also Free Enterprise was a great film and very original. Highly recomend the 2-disc version as they redid alot of the effects and added some new scenes.

By: Vic

Vic — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:22:06 +0000

Hey Steve,

Go easy on The Shat – he’s a cool guy. Have you ever watched the movie “Free Enterprise”? If not, run, don’t walk to go out and rent/buy it.

It will give you a whole new view of Shatner.

Awesome movie. Guarantee you’ll love it.

Vic

By: steve adams

steve adams — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 05:07:31 +0000

shatners working his buutt off now so that one day in the near future he can have his head placed in a jar and then continue to do voiceover work as Cap Kirk, Tj, whatever.

By: steve adams

steve adams — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 05:00:49 +0000

Yea I heard about that Andy. How lame would that be if it was turned into a screeplay. VERY. The hardcore fans would freakout.
( Can hear them now, THE BORG are overdone!!!!!)
^
The book was CO-written by shatner. That means shatner told other writers what he wanted in the story and then drove down to Manhatten beach to shoot “Boston Legal”. Its all about the cash Andy. Same with his involvement with the new film. Do you really think he’s bummed he’s not in the film because the fans want him in it.
Please!!

Its all about him and the deal.
^
I’m so done with shatner I wish he would go to Risa and leave us alone.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 04:52:18 +0000

I don’t know how many of the people here read the Star Trek novels, but in one of the ones written after Generations, Kirk is revived through Borg nanites. The book is called “The Return” and was authored by Shatner. Even Kirk can’t die even after he’s dead. LOL.

By: steve adams

steve adams — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:22:27 +0000

Jonson Even if we
were to forget that Kirk died in Generations at his age he would be retired from Starfleet. Shatners very out of Federation shape.
^
IMO, most Star Trek fans will see the film weather he’s in it or not because Star Trek isn’t about Kirk.
^
Shatner NOT in this film won’t matter at all at the BO.

By: jonson roth

jonson roth — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:07:59 +0000

Which is really weird because J.J. Abrams gave all kinds of nonsense reasons why Shatner couldn’t be in this movie. And if he’s lying, then he’s seriously in danger of pissing off generations of Star Trek fans. (I already hate Cloverfield, which he produced; I don’t want to hate Star Trek)

By: Vic

Vic — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:40:56 +0000

I agree with you. Nimoy doesn’t strike me as someone who takes projects lightly, especially one in which he could become so infamous if it turns out to be a bad movie.

Vic

By: beaver

beaver — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:29:49 +0000

Regardless of what I read, I still consider the fact that Nimoy joined the cast only because he thought the script was really good. Everyone needs to “remember” that he was responsible for most of the best Star Trek movies. I trust Leonard Nimoy!

By: Vic

Vic — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:14:57 +0000

I haven’t heard anything about that.

Vic

By: rc

rc — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 06:22:18 +0000

Just wanted to know if their is any other info about TNG casting?

By: Panda

Panda — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:48:11 +0000

I suppose my point is, if they want to do an origins-style story (i.e. show how Kirk beat the Maru test, met Spock, became Captain of the Enterprise, etc.) then just do a prequel.

For a franchise who wants to move forward, they do a lot of traveling backward in time…

By: Panda

Panda — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:41:51 +0000

Vic,
To clarify, I was being sarcastic about the Borg… maybe I should have said Ferenghi.

My point is… give us something new! Why have an alternate TNG era at all in the movie? Is this Back to the Future 2?

I guess it will be Nero (TNG-era Romulan) and Spock jump back to academy-era Kirk, return to the TNG era and find the timeline changed(ala Yesterday’s Enterprise and City at the Edge of Forever), then go back to correct it. Too much if they’re trying to get a new audience. I hope I’m wrong