Why did they bother...

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Captain Nebula, May 26, 2013.

  1. TREK_GOD_1

    TREK_GOD_1 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Location:
    Escaped from Delta Vega
    Conjecture. Notice how quick you were to dismiss a real experience as proof of nothing, meanwhile some perform message board gymnastics trying to pretend history did not play out a certain way.

    The experience the member recalled is fact (unless you have evidence to render it a lie), just as i've experienced the same thing with people who do not count themselves as ST fans.

    Oh, for.... Another silly comparison--almost as out there as the Elmer Fudd post.

    For the moment, i'll play...

    If I take a pic of Karloff as the Monster, then set it next to stills of Michael Sarrazin & De Niro as the same character, and say, "which one's Frankenstein's Monster?"

    Let's see how honest you are about which one will get the nod.

    Hint: it will not be the 1973 or 1994 versions.

    The same applies to Shatner and Nimoy. They have cut a deep path into the road of pop culture--elevating and in some ways, transcending it, so at best, all you would get in a side by side is John Q. Public looking at nuTrek like a fan film, or cosplay.

    It has been defined, but if some wish to protect something that (more than likely) will not have TOS impact, then such things do not exist.
     
  2. TREK_GOD_1

    TREK_GOD_1 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Location:
    Escaped from Delta Vega
    So, if Jack Black....yes that Jack Black--as is--slipped on the pointed ears, delivered his lines in a monotone voice and sported the haircut, he would be Spock, just as much as Nimoy?
     
  3. Captain Nebula

    Captain Nebula Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Not even close. Spock would never have a relationship with his subordinate. He would have thought it inappropriate. And I really can't blame it on the actors because they did try. But it just wasn't written into the story for them to act like they were the original characters. I can see how this could affect Kirk as he had a father in the original and didn't for more than a few minutes in the nuTrek. But did the destruction of the Kelvin really affect that much? I can mostly chalk it up to it being a parallel universe as the reason that they are acting that much different. But as I said, a character like Scotty, the personality just wasn't there. It was all just his accent. Or maybe it was the apparent intelligence that wasn't there. Both Scotty and Spock stick out the most in that. They were supposed to be the smartest ones on the ship and then Chekov was doing his "Wesley Crusher with a Russian accent" imitation in the first movie.

    I wish they had a clapping Smilie just for this post.
     
  4. RPJOB

    RPJOB Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2012
    Sadly, yes. Yes he would.

    The problem is that Star Trek is a franchise. Star Trek is not defined by what it says, how it looks or who the actors are. Star trek is whatever the owner of the franchise says it is. If they did a Jack Black as Spock comedy movie, that would be Star Trek. If the did a Quinten Tarantino bloodfest, that would be Star Trek.

    Star Trek exists for one reason, to make money for the trademark holder. That's it. It's not there to push the boundaries of science fiction or to tell little morality plays in a space setting. It's to make as much money for Roddenberry or Desilu or Paramount or CBS as possible. If what they do is popular, that makes them more money. If it's not, they make less money and they try something else, either a new setting line TNG or DS9 or a reboot like JJ's version.

    So the answer is yes, Jack Black could be Spock. I don't think he'd make a good one but my opinion doesn't matter. If enough people like him as Spock then he's Spock until they get tired of him and Star Trek moves on to something else.

    Such is the entertainment industry.
     
  5. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    I merely pointed out she was citing an anecdote, and a second-hand one at that. It would be inadmissible evidence. Why? Because it doesn't prove anything relevant to the argument.

    All it proves is she has a friend who says he met some people in a far-away land who knew who Kirk and Spock were. That only suggests they're familiar. It does not prove they're iconic.

    Now you're just piling fallacy on top of fallacy. But I'm not going to indulge any further. This is really side-stepping the topic, and I'm starting to lecture--I don't want to make Shar angry. :cool:

    sj's Fudd analogy was a sound one. I'm sorry you didn't like it.

    However, calling the Superman comparison "silly" only proves you still don't understand what an icon is.

    Icons:
    [​IMG]
    Each is a different image, but the vast majority of people in the world know they all mean the same thing. The person wearing it, be him/her real or drawn, is irrelevant.

    Aside from calling me a liar, you're basing your conclusion on a false premise.

    The "iconic" Frankenstein's Monster is a derivative composite of the Dawly, Testa, and Whale films combined with various re-imagings of the period.

    As such, there have been plenty of dolls, posters, paintings, etc. that are all clearly Frankenstein's monster and look nothing like Karloff specifically.

    Certainly, the Whale films influenced the modern image heavily. But the traits that people associate with the Monster have nothing to do with Karloff or his face.

    More to the point, I used Charlie Chaplin as an example way up-thread. How many people actually know what Chaplin looked liked?

    I could post side by side pictures of Chaplin, RDJ, and the guy from the 80s IBM commercials (who I think might have even been a woman), and I bet a lot of people wouldn't be able to tell them apart. Unfortunately, I couldn't find three that were close enough to make a valid comparison without heavy photoshopping, and I didn't want to bother.

    As far as the whole De Niro thing, I think most people would be able to figure it out. You don't give them enough credit.

    Funny thing though, Branagh based his on the Shelly cover. It was the definitive image of Frankenstein's Monster for a century. You've just proved Greg Cox's point.

    Oh please... :rolleyes:

    Trying to think of the number of pop figures that have actually reached this level of iconic status. The Mouse and Supes have already been mentioned. Bats is close, but not quite. No other comic book hero even comes close.

    The only others I could think of were Elvis and a Beatle.

    Now the iconic image of Elvis is most likely "old" Elvis, and that begs the question was it created by him himself or by the last 40 years of Vegas impersonators?

    And by "a Beatle," I don't mean any one specifically, but a generic composite--like one of those photoshop scramble thingies of mop-top John, Paul, and George. (Sorry Ringo.)

    I have no idea what this means.

    Could be awesome.

    People need to stop lobbying for Nimoy's ownership of a character. He has stated it's not his.
     
  6. The Old Mixer

    The Old Mixer Clean Old Mod Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Location:
    Somewhere in Connecticut
    Please don't give the producers any ideas....
     
  7. BriGuy

    BriGuy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Because without Kirk, Spock, McCoy, the Enterprise, etc. it's not "Star Trek."

    Part of the allure is it's the original characters, even if they are different.

    A whole new crew thrown in a movie with the name "Star Trek" wouldn't get financed, because no one would want to take such a gamble.
     
  8. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    You're correct and sj4iy is utterly, completely wrong.
     
  9. sj4iy

    sj4iy Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Does James Bond have to have dark hair and speak with a Scottish accent? They've remade Bond 6 times now and the only things they keep the same are the names. Dr. Who has has 12 actors play the same (but different) character. Both are incredibly successful franchises that have lasted just as long as Star Trek, with their ups and downs. But why can people accept them when they are far from the originals? Because they are tailored for their respective generations. The original Dr. Who would never fly today as it did in the 60s (Star Trek ISN'T the only groundbreaking sci fi show from the 60s). Same with Bond. The stories are updated and the characters more accessible to the new generations. People who prefer one iteration to others, they always do- old or young. I was born in the 80's and Connery will always be the best Bond to me. But I like Matt Smith's Doctor the best. No rhyme or reason, I just like those the best. And I prefer this version of Star Trek to the original series. Some people like both in different ways. There is no right or wrong answer- it's all about the individual.
     
  10. darkshadow0001

    darkshadow0001 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Location:
    Indiana
    I think everyone is forgetting this is supposed to be a different reality from TOS, so why the nitpicking?
     
  11. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    Depends. Is he listed as "spock" in the credits ?

    I'm glad to see that you know his thoughts so well.
     
  12. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Yeah, I don't recall that issue ever coming up on the original show. I suppose you could argue that he rejected Chapel's advances, but that was never framed as a matter of professional ethics, just a bad case of unrequited love on Chapel's part.
     
  13. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    And here's what he probably would have really looked like, if he existed at all:
    [​IMG]

    *bites tongue not to compare Khan to Jesus*
     
  14. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Quinto is Spock now, and Pine is Kirk. When they aren't any more, two other actors will be. Shatner and Nimoy never will be, again, except for the possible odd homage or TV commercial. Sooner or later neither will be anything at all, and the same is true for all their fans. This is the way life works.
     
  15. Alex1939

    Alex1939 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    So profound! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  16. Locutus of Bored

    Locutus of Bored Co-Founder of ISIS Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntington Beach, California
    You were told here that if you argued another mod action in a thread instead of taking it to the MA forum (after PMing the mod in question first) that you would receive a warning.

    Infraction, filed under OTHER. Comments to PM.
     
  17. Zeppster

    Zeppster Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I actually think most of the characters do a good job with elements of their counterparts just different twists on them as events have been changes.
     
  18. YARN

    YARN Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Allow me to just ask a few questions so that I may better understand and comply with officially enforced rules.

    Are you speaking of a genuinely "personal preference" or are you making policy?

    Are the words "apologize," the Latinate term identifying the "you too" argument, and opposite of "licit" forbidden here?

    If so, are these words forbidden in this subforum, or the whole board? Would I be out of line using or mentioning these terms in the Tech subforum?

    Is it forbidden to use these terms as well as mention these terms?

    Is it that I am forbidden or that everyone is forbidden from using these words?

    Are there other words I should be aware of (outside of obvious one like various expletives and terms commonly associated with personal attacks)?
     
  19. Locutus of Bored

    Locutus of Bored Co-Founder of ISIS Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntington Beach, California
    I don't know what it is about these posts from M'Sharak that gave you the impression that he was looking to have an extended conversation about board policy with you in the middle of the thread.

    http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=8163214&postcount=102
    http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=8164108&postcount=119

    Or what part you misunderstood about this very recent post by me making it clear that complaints or clarifications about board policy can be taken to PM and then eventually on to Moderator Actions if you remain unsatisfied.

    http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=8170981&postcount=176

    It seems pretty clear you wish to continue grandstanding in the thread and arguing every little mod admonition instead of the topic, so that earns you an infraction as well. Filed under other.

    COMMENTS TO PM. This is not a suggestion.
     
  20. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    CommishSleer
    Hopefully the next generation will think of Pine and Quinto as Kirk and Spock because that means that Star Trek is still going strong.

    I agree its a generational thing. My kids have never heard of
    John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Citizen Kane, Gone With The Wind.