Listen to me, and listen to me good...

[StarTrek1701]

Star Trek is being rebooted, both as a franchise and perhaps in its established canon.

It has been updated for a new generation of moviegoers to appeal to them in the farthest reaches possible. Not to mention to all us old fans that have stuck with the franchise for 20+ years.

By what we have seen, the story seems solidly sci fi and adventure with lots of action, passion and emotions. Otherwise of course, Leonard Nimoy would not be attached to it.

Star Trek is getting a new lease on life, fresh blood being injected to it, restarting it's glory that it had before. I hope and believe it will be one of the top 3 grossing movies of 2009 and usher in a new era where Star Trek once again dominates the science fiction memories of the general public.

So you naysayers can suck it, and suck it hard. Your pathetic attempts at trying to say it will be a bad movie because it doesn't adhere to random inconsistent continuity issues makes you look like utter losers.

For us true fans here, we are glad Star Trek will once again be a powerhouse of a franchise that clouds over every other franchise like it did from the 80's to the mid 90's.

Bring on May 2009, fuck yeah!

 

[MattJC]

Star Trek is being rebooted, both as a franchise and perhaps in its established canon.

It has been updated for a new generation of moviegoers to appeal to them in the farthest reaches possible. Not to mention to all us old fans that have stuck with the franchise for 20+ years.

By what we have seen, the story seems solidly sci fi and adventure with lots of action, passion and emotions. Otherwise of course, Leonard Nimoy would not be attached to it.

Star Trek is getting a new lease on life, fresh blood being injected to it, restarting it's glory that it had before. I hope and believe it will be one of the top 3 grossing movies of 2009 and usher in a new era where Star Trek once again dominates the science fiction memories of the general public.

So you naysayers can suck it, and suck it hard. Your pathetic attempts at trying to say it will be a bad movie because it doesn't adhere to random inconsistent continuity issues makes you look like utter losers.

For us true fans here, we are glad Star Trek will once again be a powerhouse of a franchise that clouds over every other franchise like it did from the 80's to the mid 90's.

Bring on May 2009, fuck yeah!

Excuse me?
Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

 

[gastrof]

To the OP:

Last thing I heard, the story is supposedly taking place within established continuity.

How that's possible with the changes we see...

I'll reserve comment on that.

One thing I'm sure of, however, and that's that the movie has yet to be seen and so you have no more certainty of how good it'll be than those who say otherwise do with their position.

"Suck it up" and wait.

The movie comes out in May. You won't have seen it before then, will you?

As for other fans who have points of view different from yours being "losers", all I can say is "the bigger they are..."

 

[trekkerguy]

I still wish I new what all these changes are that have effected continuity are...

Excuse me?
Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

You're the ones who assume it's crap before seeing it. But oh well, won't miss you in line.

 

[StarTrek1701]

Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

Those of you who would hate ANY new iteration of Star Trek because it doesn't adhere to your twisted sense of continuity are not only not true fans but an abomination to the entire Trek fandom.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Star Trek is being rebooted, both as a franchise and perhaps in its established canon.

It has been updated for a new generation of moviegoers to appeal to them in the farthest reaches possible. Not to mention to all us old fans that have stuck with the franchise for 20+ years.

By what we have seen, the story seems solidly sci fi and adventure with lots of action, passion and emotions. Otherwise of course, Leonard Nimoy would not be attached to it.

Star Trek is getting a new lease on life, fresh blood being injected to it, restarting it's glory that it had before. I hope and believe it will be one of the top 3 grossing movies of 2009 and usher in a new era where Star Trek once again dominates the science fiction memories of the general public.

So you naysayers can suck it, and suck it hard. Your pathetic attempts at trying to say it will be a bad movie because it doesn't adhere to random inconsistent continuity issues makes you look like utter losers.

For us true fans here, we are glad Star Trek will once again be a powerhouse of a franchise that clouds over every other franchise like it did from the 80's to the mid 90's.

Bring on May 2009, fuck yeah!

Works for me.

Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are [sic] way aren't "true fans"?

Well, no more so than those of us who are excited and pleased by what we're seeing of the new movie - and it's become quite the style around here for some who are disappointed to post as if we're somehow lesser than they (which would be pretty unlikely).

 

[StarTrek1701]

One thing I'm sure of, however, and that's that the movie has yet to be seen and so you have no more certainty of how good it'll be than those who say otherwise do with their position.

Looking at certain stills you can get a generalized idea whether the movie will be good or not. The naysayers just want to hate it because of goddamn registry numbers and the bridge not being an exact replica from the sixties.

 

[trekkerguy]

Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

Those of you who would hate ANY new iteration of Star Trek because it doesn't adhere to your twisted sense of continuity are not only not true fans but an abomination to the entire Trek fandom.

Maybe we shouldn't go this far. No reason to get personal.

There's always need for DVD fans.

One thing I'm sure of, however, and that's that the movie has yet to be seen and so you have no more certainty of how good it'll be than those who say otherwise do with their position.

I suppose there's not. But what's the use in not liking it? At least being excited for it is more fun.

 

[cbp44189]

Star Trek is being rebooted, both as a franchise and perhaps in its established canon.

It has been updated for a new generation of moviegoers to appeal to them in the farthest reaches possible. Not to mention to all us old fans that have stuck with the franchise for 20+ years.

By what we have seen, the story seems solidly sci fi and adventure with lots of action, passion and emotions. Otherwise of course, Leonard Nimoy would not be attached to it.

Star Trek is getting a new lease on life, fresh blood being injected to it, restarting it's glory that it had before. I hope and believe it will be one of the top 3 grossing movies of 2009 and usher in a new era where Star Trek once again dominates the science fiction memories of the general public.

So you naysayers can suck it, and suck it hard. Your pathetic attempts at trying to say it will be a bad movie because it doesn't adhere to random inconsistent continuity issues makes you look like utter losers.

For us true fans here, we are glad Star Trek will once again be a powerhouse of a franchise that clouds over every other franchise like it did from the 80's to the mid 90's.

Bring on May 2009, fuck yeah!

Excuse me?
Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

You've been putting this movie down since preproduction, your opinion doesn't exactly carry much weight.

 

[MattJC]

Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

Those of you who would hate ANY new iteration of Star Trek because it doesn't adhere to your twisted sense of continuity are not only not true fans but an abomination to the entire Trek fandom.

Who the hell died and made you the "decider" on who is a true fan or not?

 

[Dar70]

Why is it assumed a reboot just because the sets and actors are different???? Superman Returns used new actors and even moved the setting into the early 2000's, BUT kept the backstory of the first two film mostly intact. Trek XI to be seems to be adhering to most eveything except visualcontinuity. WHY cant people just ignore that the damn sets dont match the originals and just enjoy the story?????

 

[StarTrek1701]

Maybe we shouldn't go this far. No reason to get personal.

There's always need for DVD fans.

Nothing personal. Just talking of cranky fans in general.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

WHY cant people just ignore that the damn sets dont match the originals and just enjoy the story?????

As someone who is really happy with everything I see regarding this movie, I'll play devil's advocate just a little - a movie is a whole experience. Most notably, it's a visual experience. If one has to ignore what they see in order to "just enjoy the story" they could more profitably spend the time reading.

 

[trekkerguy]

Why is it assumed a reboot just because the sets and actors are different. Superman Returns used new actors and even moved the setting into the early 2000's, BUT kept the backstory of the first two film mostly intact. Trek XI to be seems to be adhering to most eveything except visualcontinuity. WHY cant people just ignore that the damn sets dont match the originals and just enjoy the story?????

That just makes too much damn sense, that's why.

 

[Sector 7]

"Can't we all just get along?" - Rodney King
"For God's sake, stop hitting me with that brick!" - Reginald Denny

I think BOTH sides need to calm down, respect each others' right to exist and play nice. Enough is enough.
Both sides have valid points and both sides have fanatics. So let's lose the angry rhetoric and behave like adults (those of you who are capable, that is).

 

[trekkerguy]

"Can't we all just get along?" - Rodney King
"For God's sake, stop hitting me with that brick!" - Reginald Denny

I think BOTH sides need to calm down, respect each others' right to exist and play nice. Enough is enough.
Both sides have valid points and both sides have fanatics. So let's lose the angry rhetoric and behave like adults (those of you who are capable, that is).

What... logic?

 

[StarTrek1701]

Those of use who won't swallow whatever crap Abrams throws are way aren't "true fans"?

Those of you who would hate ANY new iteration of Star Trek because it doesn't adhere to your twisted sense of continuity are not only not true fans but an abomination to the entire Trek fandom.

Who the hell died and made you the "decider" on who is a true fan or not?

Joyce Mason.

 

[MattJC]

That's real classy.

 

[StarTrek1701]

That's real classy.

More than your constant barrage at a movie you hated ever since it was mentioned.

 

[gastrof]

One thing I'm sure of, however, and that's that the movie has yet to be seen and so you have no more certainty of how good it'll be than those who say otherwise do with their position.

I suppose there's not. But what's the use in not liking it? At least being excited for it is more fun.

Some people were hoping that when something's said to take place within an existing continuity they know, and that only the actors have changed, that things will reflect that.

The visuals of the bridge alone and the description of it being OVAL rather than round (and of the phasers being somewhat similar in design to SIX SHOOTESR) suggest this is something other than the original.

People are feeling a little let down, and well they should. It makes no sense to say "This is only part of the existing timeline, and doesn't overwrite anything", and then a few months later reveal that it is in some ways VERY different.

If they'd changed the tech and the ship only to the degree the uniforms have been changed, I'd be FAR more accepting.

As it is, I have to view this as NOT what was promised, and either a divergent timeline which DOES overwrite the Trek we know, or at least a parallel universe.

In the back of my mind, tho', I've got his little hope that once all the temporal wrinkles have been ironed out, we may be surprised to see what the bridge actually looks like at the end of the film.

I'm going, but I'd be looking forward to it a bit more if I'd seen things like a red railing and no "hostess" stand next to Kirk's chair.

Little things can mean a lot to people where something they love is concerned.