RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,419
Posts: 5,506,513
Members: 25,131
Currently online: 416
Newest member: Talosian1978

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 26 2013, 07:59 PM   #16
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

sj4iy wrote: View Post
Who doesn't want to see California destroyed over and over again?
If you're going to crash kilometre-wide starships and drill holes from orbit, by all means, keep it in San Francisco, and I can hope I am safe thousands of kilometres away. Don't you even think of doing dangerous stuff elsewhere.

But if you're having fun holding a conference or inviting some hot Caitians over, now, if you don't bring it here, I'd be pretty offended.
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 08:36 PM   #17
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

San Francisco also ALWAYS faces starships coming out of warp.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 08:38 PM   #18
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

YellowSubmarine wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post
Who doesn't want to see California destroyed over and over again?
If you're going to crash kilometre-wide starships and drill holes from orbit, by all means, keep it in San Francisco, and I can hope I am safe thousands of kilometres away. Don't you even think of doing dangerous stuff elsewhere.

But if you're having fun holding a conference or inviting some hot Caitians over, now, if you don't bring it here, I'd be pretty offended.
I'll keep that in mind next time I'm captain of a starship
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 08:39 PM   #19
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

I'd like to see Garak terrorize San Francisco.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 09:52 PM   #20
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Well, in STIV, we hear mention of cloud cover over Tokyo and Leningrad. So, there are at least a couple others (and we also see there are still wooden piers).
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:14 PM   #21
CrazyHorse89
Lieutenant
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Who would have predicted that Leningrad would make a comeback in the 23rd century?

I think the main reason for the lack of Earth-based diversity is pretty simple: Star Trek is, as things stand, a Western show aimed at Western audiences. Studios and directors share a fear, most probably unwarranted, that moving the focus away from Europe or North America will alienate vast swathes of the public in those two continents.

Of course, this is a damned stupid assumption. Setting a scene in future Tokyo or future Beijing would have no impact on the film's reception in the West, but it will boost the Box Office numbers in South East Asia.
CrazyHorse89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:30 PM   #22
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Well the Bond films did fairly well out of going to other locales.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:30 PM   #23
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

CrazyHorse89 wrote: View Post
Who would have predicted that Leningrad would make a comeback in the 23rd century?

I think the main reason for the lack of Earth-based diversity is pretty simple: Star Trek is, as things stand, a Western show aimed at Western audiences. Studios and directors share a fear, most probably unwarranted, that moving the focus away from Europe or North America will alienate vast swathes of the public in those two continents.

Of course, this is a damned stupid assumption. Setting a scene in future Tokyo or future Beijing would have no impact on the film's reception in the West, but it will boost the Box Office numbers in South East Asia.
To be fair, they are destroying those Western cities. I'm sure Asian fans would rather not see that happen to their cities in a movie (Godzilla did enough in Tokyo).
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:33 PM   #24
Jeff O'Connor
Commodore
 
Jeff O'Connor's Avatar
 
Location: Tampa, FL
View Jeff O'Connor's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to Jeff O'Connor Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Jeff O'Connor
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

There's a grand total of fewer than five hours of film between the two flicks, so the fact that we've gotten three Earth locations ought to be good enough, really. Especially when, uh, one of the biggest complaints going into STID was that it's so Earth-centric!
__________________
Star Trek
1966-
Jeff O'Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:08 AM   #25
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

CrazyHorse89 wrote: View Post
Who would have predicted that Leningrad would make a comeback in the 23rd century?
What, you think Communism is dead? Geez, the 23rd century is apparently nothin' but!
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:56 AM   #26
Rķu rķu, chķu
Fleet Admiral
 
Rķu rķu, chķu's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View Rķu rķu, chķu's Twitter Profile
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

You'd think that San Franciscans and Londoners would be proud that their cities survived Trek's WWIII intact. (I figure they had to - there's no way cities that big could be completely rebuilt from scratch in only 200 years.)
__________________
"A hot dog at the ballpark is better than a steak at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart
Rķu rķu, chķu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:36 AM   #27
Corran Horn
Vice Admiral
 
Corran Horn's Avatar
 
Location: I-L
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
I'd like to see Garak terrorize San Francisco.
In case you were wondering if somebody got that I did.
__________________
"I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't do drugs. I play video games, which I think is a far superior addiction to any of those other ones. "
Corran Horn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 24 2013, 11:28 PM   #28
Mountie1988
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
CommishSleer wrote: View Post
I'm looking at the recent action/alien movies as I think its a universal constant that they attack San Fran
The Avengers beg to differ.
Yeah, Stuttgart

And Heilbronn in Sherlock Holmes II, for whatever reason...
Mountie1988 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 25 2013, 01:15 AM   #29
Kevman7987
Commander
 
Kevman7987's Avatar
 
Location: Erie, PA, USA
View Kevman7987's Twitter Profile
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Corran Horn wrote: View Post
CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
I'd like to see Garak terrorize San Francisco.
In case you were wondering if somebody got that I did.
I don't get it...
__________________
"Don't do it, Meat!"
"Don't do it, Cheese!"
Kevman7987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 25 2013, 02:37 AM   #30
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Why are there only two cities in the future? (spoilers)

Kevman7987 wrote: View Post
Corran Horn wrote: View Post
CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
I'd like to see Garak terrorize San Francisco.
In case you were wondering if somebody got that I did.
I don't get it...
The role of Garak was played by Andrew Robinson, who much earlier in his career had played the Scorpio killer in Dirty Harry.
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.