RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,157
Posts: 5,402,308
Members: 24,750
Currently online: 552
Newest member: yadmank

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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 January 16 2008, 01:14 AM   #76
Woulfe
Commodore
 
Woulfe's Avatar
 
Location: 3rd Rock From The Sun
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

^ 2020 perhaps ?

Heh heh heh heh heh, we'll call it the roaring 20's 2.0
Woulfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 01:15 AM   #77
Kegek
Rear Admiral
 
Kegek's Avatar
 
Location: Somewhere You're Not
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

Metropolis was mainly influenced by German Expressionist art, and the emerging German Objectivist art, as well as what we call Art Deco. The most expressionistic influence on its architecture can be seen quite early in the film, when Freder Fredersen gestures out at the city to his father and we subsequently see a series of - impossible - architectural creations.

There are plenty of other visual nods as well, offhand, there is a Satanic pentagram behind the robot as it is being transformed into Maria's doppelganger. As far as pulps go, there are native German pulps of the era - Lang's next science fiction film, Woman on the Moon, includes a scene where a young boy shows off his science fiction pulps. I don't know if these had any influence.
__________________
"Tell me this, do they have auditions for television?"
"That's all television is, my dear - nothing but auditions."

- All About Eve.
Kegek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 01:27 AM   #78
Woulfe
Commodore
 
Woulfe's Avatar
 
Location: 3rd Rock From The Sun
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

^ I didn't know all that see.... Well, I do now thanks for all that info on Metropolis.... Point is that George Lucas along with ILM, made the city planet in that same design, one only has to look at it and see it's there.

This only proves that there's nothing wrong with retro-future design, just a different way to present it up to people in this day and age.

Yea, I liked the prequel trilogy, so sue me
Woulfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 01:31 AM   #79
Kegek
Rear Admiral
 
Kegek's Avatar
 
Location: Somewhere You're Not
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

I did like a lot of the design aesthetic of the prequel trilogy. And hell, I like retro-futurism sui generis. But that's probably not what Abrams is going for; and I hope whatever Abrams is going for is something I find appealling.
__________________
"Tell me this, do they have auditions for television?"
"That's all television is, my dear - nothing but auditions."

- All About Eve.
Kegek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 01:59 AM   #80
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

Dale Hoppert said:
stj said:Slash was invented to explain how Kirk and Spock got to be such friends. That's the only interesting character backstory.
Slash was invented because 'shippers see sex everywhere and some people just have to perv' every thing up. I think exploring the friendship between these two very different individuals is much more interesting than simply dissecting every scene looking for clues that "GASP! They're DOING IT!"
The family reunion of unrelated young people seems like a really bad idea. Slash was mentioned to emphasize how unusual the Kirk/Spock relationship was. Is it more annoying to be persistently misread as advocating a slash movie? Or more annoying to read this hysterical drivel?

A slash movie would almost certainly be way too imaginative for Abrams whose character work on Lost is derivative. I'm not a 'shipper nor am I into slash---I'm not into fan fiction generally---I don't even like the tie-in novels! But the remarks above came across as so arrogant and bigoted I now hope Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto show us how to do it in freefall.
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 02:48 AM   #81
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

stj said:The family reunion of unrelated young people seems like a really bad idea. Slash was mentioned to emphasize how unusual the Kirk/Spock relationship was. Is it more annoying to be persistently misread as advocating a slash movie? Or more annoying to read this hysterical drivel?
To be fair, you have no idea what form of roles the "second bananas" in this film will serve. I don't expect to see very much of any of them. I expect lots of Quinto and lots of Pine. I expect a fair amount of pre-TOS Urban, too. As for the rest of 'em... I'd be stunned to see them get more than a couple of lines and a few minutes of screentime.

So THAT part of your concern I think is unfounded. Of course, if it DOES turn out that it's "Star Trek Babies" or whatever... I'll be right there alongside ya with my pitchfork and torch!

I read your post as advocating (no pun intended) "slash." But I did give you the opportunity to correct that impression. I was shocked by the implication of your post but instead of just absorbing what I BELIEVE you meant, I asked... so you'd have a chance to CLARIFY.
A slash movie would almost certainly be way too imaginative for Abrams whose character work on Lost is derivative.
I'd hardly consider it "imaginative." Quite the contrary in fact. I don't consider the plots of pornos, whether straight or gay (if I ever saw one of those) to be very likely to be particularly IMAGINATIVE. They're all about justifying why two (or more!) people are gettin' jiggy wit' it. Pornos tend to make every relationship, ultimately, about sex. And slash, frankly, strikes me as just being another form of porno. I don't consider it to be REMOTELY "imaginative." Quite the opposite, in fact.

Hell, even if Spock WAS gay... he only gets horny once every seven years! SHEESHHH!
I'm not a 'shipper nor am I into slash---I'm not into fan fiction generally---I don't even like the tie-in novels! But the remarks above came across as so arrogant and bigoted I now hope Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto show us how to do it in freefall.
"Arrogant?" "Bigoted?" I see neither of those. I see disagreement. And guess what? Disagreement is not "arrogance" or "bigotry."

I'm guessing you're gay. No need to clarify unless you want to. There's a fairly large number of gay folks on this board (close, probably, to the debunked Kinsey "10%" number, I'd guess... in other words, well above the actual national average!). But most of 'em, you'd never be able to tell. Which is as it should be. What's private is private. I may occasionally make a joke about wanting to see Kirk fighting zombies along with Mila Jovovich... ... but otherwise, I keep my OWN sexual preferences separate. (I'm suggesting that scene due to my interest in HER, not HIM, just FYI! )

My concern wasn't the suggestion that someone in Trek might be gay. Just that I find it inappropriate and derogatory to suggest that two male characters MUST be gay in order to feel any form of closeness towards each other... ie, that "feeling closeness" and "having sexual feelings" are synonymous.

They aren't. We all know that, I think. But your original post seemed to say exactly that.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16 2008, 07:25 AM   #82
TorontoTrekker
Vice Admiral
 
TorontoTrekker's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: No reason the current cast couldn't do a TV series.

Kegek said:
StarMan said:
So, movie franchise to TV franchise, as opposed to the other way round? Is there a precedent for that?
Aside from Star Trek's previous metamorphsis from TVH to TNG?

Yup. Stargate. Buffy too I believe. Neither show used the same actors as the films, IIRC.
Not in the principal cast, though Alexis Cruz (Skaara) and Erick Avari (Kasuf) have both reprised their Stargate film roles in the TV series, and an argument can be made that Kurt Russell's Colonel O'Neil exists in the TV show's universe - there's an episode where O'Neill tells a reporter, "It's O'Neill, with *two* L's. There's another Colonel O'Neil with only one L. He has no sense of humor at all."

But yes, there are precedents for a franchise moving from the theatres to TV.
TorontoTrekker 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 08:19 PM.

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