RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,162
Posts: 5,402,542
Members: 24,751
Currently online: 556
Newest member: kaklina

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 Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 30 2008, 06:42 PM   #406
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Not if it fills seats on opening weekend.
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 06:47 PM   #407
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

And if it doesn't?

Or more importantly, if it fails to fill seats the next week? Remember, Star Trek V set a box office record its opening weekend, so any sci-fi film can win the opening week. Case in point: Cloverfield. Boffo box office opening weekend, dropping like a Stuka dive bomber the next.

What should be keeping these guys up nights is what happens if the fans, the ones so many are willing to write off as irrelevant, don't show up at all, and we have a repeat of Nemesis.

The more they stray into reboot territory, the more likely this thing won't even open.
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 07:06 PM   #408
Arlo
Fleet Captain
 
Arlo's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

I saw Cloverfield- dug it- but the drop off didn't surprise me; it's a niche film, and a bit divisive.

STXI is a different story. JJ's cred + a (so far) excellent marketing strategy + a fresh approach to popular characters = a much better chance to have legs.

Nemesis tanked not only because it was a piece of crap, but I think people were frankly tired of the TNG crew on yet another redundant outing in that godawful fanboy Enterprise E.
__________________
"Even with all its blemishes, Trek XI still teabags the bloated corpses that were Insurrection and Nemesis and managed to make Trek fun again." - Sheep
Arlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 07:08 PM   #409
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

You do the best you can in their position, yes?
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 07:27 PM   #410
USS Mariner
Rear Admiral
 
USS Mariner's Avatar
 
Location: Homestate of Matt Jefferies
View USS Mariner's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to USS Mariner Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to USS Mariner
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Captain Robert April said:

The more they stray into reboot territory, the more likely this thing won't even open.
I don't mind reboot territory, as they just as easily could jettison all post-TOS material and still be a "reboot" (though that would be more like TimeMachine.)

The thing that bothers me is that it looks as if they're creating something even less inspired that the last set of entrées from Casa de Trek.

Mind you, I'd like it to succeed, but not by turning Trek into either a mindless actionfest or prissy nerd-poetry.
__________________
Ignorance is forgivable,
Arrogance is reprehensible,
Narcissism is intolerable.

Subspace Commns Network ~ Visit Marinina!
USS Mariner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 08:46 PM   #411
Holytomato
Fleet Captain
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

"Nemesis tanked not only because it was a piece of crap, but I think people were frankly tired of the TNG crew on yet another redundant outing in that godawful fanboy Enterprise E."

The Enterprise E is based on the Phase II movie design. Same as Star Trek XI's. :grin:

"What should be keeping these guys up nights is what happens if the fans, the ones so many are willing to write off as irrelevant, don't show up at all, and we have a repeat of Nemesis.

The more they stray into reboot territory, the more likely this thing won't even open."

The Relevant Old Fogey Fans tm did show up for The Non Reboot Nemesis tm, and it still flopped.

Star Trek XI is not being made for The Relevant Old Fogey Fans tm

Which means The Relevant Old Fogey Fans tm are The Irrelevant Old Fogey Fans tm.

Star Trek XI: Not Made for The Irrelevant Old Fogey Fans tm :thumbsup:
Holytomato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 09:38 PM   #412
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Tomato, see that button in the blue bar above each post that says "quote"?

Just an irrelevant old fogey tryin' to help.
Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 10:01 PM   #413
Arlo
Fleet Captain
 
Arlo's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Holytomato said:
"Nemesis tanked not only because it was a piece of crap, but I think people were frankly tired of the TNG crew on yet another redundant outing in that godawful fanboy Enterprise E."

The Enterprise E is based on the Phase II movie design. Same as Star Trek XI's. :grin:

Uh...what?
__________________
"Even with all its blemishes, Trek XI still teabags the bloated corpses that were Insurrection and Nemesis and managed to make Trek fun again." - Sheep
Arlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30 2008, 11:28 PM   #414
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Holytomato said:
The Enterprise E is based on the Phase II movie design. Same as Star Trek XI's. :grin:
Still untrue. And still foolish.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 31 2008, 12:53 AM   #415
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

^Hey, you're irrelevant, keep quiet up there.
Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 31 2008, 01:04 AM   #416
Lookingglassman
Admiral
 
Lookingglassman's Avatar
 
Location: America
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Looks good. I cant wait to see this movie.
Lookingglassman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1 2008, 11:02 AM   #417
ST-One
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Mariner Class said:
Captain Robert April said:

The more they stray into reboot territory, the more likely this thing won't even open.
I don't mind reboot territory, as they just as easily could jettison all post-TOS material and still be a "reboot" (though that would be more like TimeMachine.)

The thing that bothers me is that it looks as if they're creating something even less inspired that the last set of entrées from Casa de Trek.

Mind you, I'd like it to succeed, but not by turning Trek into either a mindless actionfest or prissy nerd-poetry.
And you come to that conclusion how?
ST-One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 2 2008, 10:31 AM   #418
Broker
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Guess I'll weigh in on this issue. I've had a big problem with fandom for quite a while now. Specifically in their unwillingness to accept new ideas. What worked in 1966 doesn't work in 2008. Nor does what worked in 1987. Roberto Orci and JJ Abrams have gone on record many times explaining what they are attempting to do. The fact of the matter is that the future as depicted in 1966 is no longer futuristic. How many of us walk around with communicators that have more functionality than Kirk's did? They are attempting to "re-futurize" Star Trek. To bring back the wonder and fantasy of it all.
Add to the fact that the current Star Trek universe has been so mined that there is nothing left to do. I have been a supporter of some kind of reboot for many years now.
The adventures we know will always be there, but there is no reason why we cannot start again with the same characters, despite what some fanboys may think.
No one is a bigger fan of The Shatner than I. But I am not opposed to seeing someone else in the role.
Consider how reboots have done wonders for ailing franchises. Battlestar Galactica and James Bond being the most obvious and successful.
My biggest fear is all of the people who are already bashing this project, before a frame has even been seen, simply because it is not the Trek they know, will have some kind of effect on the success of this new adventure.
Much like their hatred of Enterprise destroyed the franchise on television.
If you destroy any chance of success, what will that get you? No more Trek at all.
Keep an open mind. Everything you love will always be around. So why not given something new a chance.
Broker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 2 2008, 12:50 PM   #419
Sean_McCormick
Captain
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Broker said:
[...]
Much like their hatred of Enterprise destroyed the franchise
[...]

What got Enterprise was not the hatred of some hardcore-Trekkers, but the fact, that too many shows (mainly in the first two seasons) were just mediocre "problem-of-the-week" episodes or even rehashes of stories done before in Trek (and not necessarily good ones).
When they finally came around and did the shows, that people wanted to see, too many people had already given up watching.
Sean_McCormick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 2 2008, 03:04 PM   #420
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

Broker wrote:

What worked in 1966 doesn't work in 2008.
This is a truism that gets said and repeated without any substantiation or proof, and it is beginning to grate on me. Why? Why doesn't it work? Give a reason, and not just a pithy aphorism. There are plenty of things that are as old as 1966 -- or much older -- that still work fine. There are designs and ways of doing things that are considered classics and are a thousand, two thousand, or five thousand years old, and are still accepted as legitimate expressions of what their creators were trying to express or achieve. Egyptians mummify in anticipation of an afterlife. Christians embalm in anticipation of resurrection. Egyptians build obelisks to memorialize great battles and fallen pharos. Americans build obelisks to memorialize great battles and fallen founders. Athenians create democracy, and Romans craft a republic, in response to failed tyranny. 2300 years later, Americans frame a democratic republic in response to failed imperialism.

The overall form of the starship is the same -- fine. It always is the same. 1701-D, Voyager, NX-01... saucer and nacelles. That much has endured. But why must one embrace the specific form of that thing that Matt Jefferies drew and that now sits in the Smithsonian? In part, because it now sits in the Smithsonian. It is classic. It is the recognized form that more than anything else, means Star Trek. If you begin to depart from the specific form, the first question that must be asked is "why?" And if the answer is "a need for added detail" then this thread and the work of other artists -- including the TOS-R team -- is ample evidence that it can be done within the constraints of the original design.

But if the answer is "because we can change things if we want to," then that motive, and not the design itself, should be held in scrutiny.

And that is where I am at the moment -- Why would anyone change it, except because they can?
aridas sofia 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 11:46 PM.

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