4.306.
Doesn't mean its a window however... just a screen with graphics as well as an outside view. Actually, windows would be very impractical on a starship, especially on the bridge.
Star Trek covers EW
- Thread starter mr.peany
- Start date
Doesn't mean its a window however... just a screen with graphics as well as an outside view. Actually, windows would be very impractical on a starship, especially on the bridge.
4.306.
Doesn't mean its a window however... just a screen with graphics as well as an outside view. Actually, windows would be very impractical on a starship, especially on the bridge.
Oops, typo. My bad.
Anyways, I remember hypothesizing in one thread that it's actually freestanding, though this may be a trick of perspective and wall details.
When you get an answer you'll have to let us know how that goes. I am generally curious.Around August some time, but the great thing is Matt is I pointed you to a place where you can ask Robert himself.. In the Hey Roberto Thread there. So if you don't care to search for the quote, just ask him the question yourself
I should do that.
I just hope Orci doesn't trash me.
I got myself banned from Trekmovie for doing exactly what I am doing here. and in a post that he responded to.
All I'm asking for is a one word answer: Reboot or not.
I would suggest that you give him your definition of 'reboot' (as there are many) so he can answer that question to your satisfaction.
Since the disscussion seems to be getting more civilised, I'm gonna go ahead and post the qutoe I edited out before, and a few more that I found that will hopefully clear things up some
From Entertainment Weekly
From Entertainment Weekly
Then from TheGuardian.co.uk's interview with JJ Abrams (via Trekmovie.come)
From these quotes it sounds to me like they are pretty much treating this as a reeboot.
Oh, of course it's a reboot. What in the ever-loving Hell is the big deal, here?
None that I can see. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Man, you can get banned from TREKMOVIE for suggesting aloud that a trek celebrity is capable of farting.
It ain't a big deal, a badge of honor, or a condemnation. It's just the control-freak aspect there, and they're probably completely at Paramount's mercy in a lot of ways.
My dealing with Par PR folks have been uniformly bad with only one significant exception, INSURRECTION, and I got the impression a lot of people didn't really care about that, which is probably why things went smoothly.
I almost turned down a recent assignment about a Par film because of that PR issue, which has to do with pic releases not happening as well as scheduling interviews and the like, but I was assured PR was being handled by an outside agency. (turns out the outside agency isn't any good at doing PR either, so the joke was on me anyway, since they've only delivered a quarter of the interviewees required for the piece.)
Personally, I'm actually kinda glad that they are treating this as a reboot. I just think it would be way to hard, and make things way to complicated to try to treat this as anything else.
As long as they are true to the feel of Star Trek and the characters, and as long as the movie itslef is good I'm gonna be a happy camper. I'll be honest, I can tell you right now that canon will be the last thing on my mind while I'm watching the movie.
As long as they are true to the feel of Star Trek and the characters, and as long as the movie itslef is good I'm gonna be a happy camper. I'll be honest, I can tell you right now that canon will be the last thing on my mind while I'm watching the movie.
Anthony's a cool dude. He only bans folks who make real trouble, insist upon arguing bigoted points or who continually drag topics off-course - some of the pro-and-anti Shatner people seem to have fallen into the latter category after months of tolerance.
Matt it is very hard.. VERY hard to get banned from donmurphy.net. Only a few certifiable whackos have ever been sent to the cornfield...
And what would that change for you, exactly, one way or the other?
Yeah the airbrushing spoils Quinto's look.
When you get an answer you'll have to let us know how that goes. I am generally curious.Around August some time, but the great thing is Matt is I pointed you to a place where you can ask Robert himself.. In the Hey Roberto Thread there. So if you don't care to search for the quote, just ask him the question yourself
I should do that.
Ok, I've posted twice to the board now asking Mr. Orci, and even though he has posted both times after I've posted, he hasn't responded to my question.
I'm going to see if he will respond to a private message.
From the interviews in EW and previous things mentioned, I get the sense that this movie will be similar to what Geoff Johns is doing in the current run of Superman comics. He acknowledges what has come before, adding the elements that work best for the stories he's telling but still do new and interesting things with the 70 year old character. I think a similar approach is being taken with this trek (pun intended). They are picking and choosing what works best for their story while phasering away the stuff that doesn't.
Who says? Since when?
The Engineering set grew in TOS when they could afford to extend the set.
The director invented a new offscreen doorway to simplify a scene in "Whom Gods Destroy", much to the cast's annoyance.
Worf's head bumps changed year after year in TNG, but not because his actual bones were changing shape. It was a makeup change. Ditto Saavik's face, height, eyebrows and even eye colour.
The visuals of ST have always changed according to script, directorial and fashion requirements.
If you notice, all the uniforms (well, the ones for the men, at least) have black, long-sleeve, undershirts. I'm sure he just has taken his off. Captain's prerogative.
~String
or it was torn in battle.... Another sign it's a reboot.
No Kirk topless with nipples visible
Similar threads
