4 Clip descriptions from Empire *Spoiler heavy*

[scotthm]

It could be a lot worse. AND much better. But what can we do? This is the "new" Classic Enterprise whether some of us would do better and different or not.

Personally, I think it has a certain "Pimp My Enterprise" look to it.

Seeing this brings back memories of Star Trek parodies in old Mad Magazines.

---------------

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I don't care if this film assfucks canon and posts its whimpering visage all over the internet, so as long as it does two things: Be immensely entertaining and drive a final nail in the coffin of all of the self righteous continuity porn fans (looking in your direction Captain Robert April), then it will be a success.

I think that is incredibly rude and unneccesary.

The long term fans are the only reason we're here, now. No fanbase, no franchise.

Is is too much to ask for entertaining AND respectful of the fans?

 

[Aragorn]

^ Which fans? Different people have different ideas of what Star Trek is or should be. There have been five different Trek TV shows that someone will call their favorite.

The whiners here who bitch and moan the same song and dance with every post think they're the one true fanbase who knows what Star Trek is all about. Hell, some of those crybabies will watch this movie more times than anyone here who loves it just so they can tell us how right they were!

 

[darkwing_duck1]

^ Which fans? Different people have different ideas of what Star Trek is or should be. There have been five different Trek TV shows that someone will call their favorite.

The whiners here who bitch and moan the same song and dance with every post think they're the one true fanbase who knows what Star Trek is all about. Hell, some of those crybabies will watch this movie more times than anyone here who loves it just so they can tell us how right they were!

I'm not denying that...I'm just suggesting that "you dance with the date that brung ya", as it were.

Would it have been that hard to write their story keeping the facts of the various characters' back stories straight? Would it have hurt to keep their PERSONALITIES straight? (Kirk may be a womanizer, but a pawing letch?) Would it have hurt to stay closer to the original sets and ship design?

If you can have BOTH sets of fans happy, why not try for that? To dismiss ALL of them just because a few of them are a little obsessive seems to be to be unecessary disrespect for those whose dollars for 4 decades have kept this franchise alive.

There is such a thing as "middle ground" here, but people don't want to see that (on BOTH sides).

 

[ChristopherPike]

First impressions tend to be very important. There are moments from each Star Trek that I wouldn't necessarily pick to be their "ambassador". Cherry pick the good moments and genuinely exciting pieces of character exchange. Then slip questionable innuendo by your audience, once they're in the theatre and all the doors are locked! They'll either be one or two nervous chuckles (a lá Insurrection) or the joke will be met with stoney silence.

Introducing people to your exciting new story through derogatory remarks about a whole section of society, or cruely assassinating a former cast member (yes, it's only a dog but it's somebody I'd choose over Simon Pegg anyday), smacks of a lack of respect to anything beyond TOS and is a horrible misfire.

Some passing of the baton from one generation to the next...

JJ Abrams: "'scuse me? I think my shiny new car just backed over a member of your family. Sorry 'bout that. By the way, I'm your new neighbour!"

 

[FordSVT]

It looks like they rolled every model of Enterprise together in some starship-o-matic and this is what came out. Saucer and torpedo launchers looks TMP, the deflector is TOS with a TMP glow, the proportions of the secondary hull look like the -D, the nacelle pylons look like they're from the -E, and the nacelles...haven't quite figured that one out yet. It's going to be a lot harder for people to think that this isn't a reboot.

Who cares? Let them think what they want, I'll think what I want. They can cry all they want too and go watch TOS or something.

I have no problem accepting this Enterprise. My God people, use your bloody imaginations and stop being slaves to literal continuity. Star Trek is a legend, a myth. That guy playing young Kirk? NOT A DE-AGED OR COMPUTER GENERATED YOUNG SHATNER. There you go, if you can get past that you can get past the rest of the visual changes.

I'm seriously not looking forward to every single thread in the future being disrupted by the town retard claiming none of it matters because the old Trek is dead and the new movie erased everything. You can believe that if you want, but I've spent the past 25 years rationalizing a million different plot holes and conflicting continuity in Star Trek to give two shits about a few new ones. There is going to be so many fan-winks in this movie precisely because JJ wants the fans to know he's really not trying to throw the baby out with the bath-water here. God, if there actually is an Archer reference, how more plainly obvious can that be to you?

You people should be happy as pigs in shit that JJ might be making a movie that could make Trek popular with the masses again, maybe even lead to more movies and another series. But some of you just don't care, you'd rather sit in your rooms with no new Trek forever than accept a few (more) changes. Pathetic and childish.

That wasn't directed at you specifically, Rat Boy.

 

[Franklin]

It looks like they rolled every model of Enterprise together in some starship-o-matic and this is what came out. Saucer and torpedo launchers looks TMP, the deflector is TOS with a TMP glow, the proportions of the secondary hull look like the -D, the nacelle pylons look like they're from the -E, and the nacelles...haven't quite figured that one out yet. It's going to be a lot harder for people to think that this isn't a reboot.

Who cares? Let them think what they want, I'll think what I want. They can cry all they want too and go watch TOS or something.

I have no problem accepting this Enterprise. My God people, use your bloody imaginations and stop being slaves to literal continuity. Star Trek is a legend, a myth. That guy playing young Kirk? NOT A DE-AGED OR COMPUTER GENERATED YOUNG SHATNER. There you go, if you can get past that you can get past the rest of the visual changes.

I'm seriously not looking forward to every single thread in the future being disrupted by the town retard claiming none of it matters because the old Trek is dead and the new movie erased everything. You can believe that if you want, but I've spent the past 25 years rationalizing a million different plot holes and conflicting continuity in Star Trek to give two shits about a few new ones. There is going to be so many fan-winks in this movie precisely because JJ wants the fans to know he's really not trying to throw the baby out with the bath-water here. God, if there actually is an Archer reference, how more plainly obvious can that be to you?

You people should be happy as pigs in shit that JJ might be making a movie that could make Trek popular with the masses again, maybe even lead to more movies and another series. But some of you just don't care, you'd rather sit in your rooms with no new Trek forever than accept a few (more) changes. Pathetic and childish.

That wasn't directed at you specifically, Rat Boy.

I don't think a lot of the criticism of the design of the new Enterprise is by people who don't like it simply because of "continuity" issues. Some may be, but not all. Quite a few posters have said it's the first real criticism they've had of anything about the movie so far.
Even if, like me, a person has no problem with redesigns and reimagining, that doesn't mean we have to like everything that comes out. It doesn't mean that anything that has NCC-1701 on it has to be swooned over. There's a difference between not entirely liking a redesign and being predisposed to not liking any changes. Some folks just don't like it. At least right now.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Here’s something to keep in mind:

According to what’s been reported, a Paramount studio executive first broached the topic of “Star Trek” to one of the now-producers of the movie.

Abrams didn’t ask Paramount; Paramount was clearly looking for a new take on “Star Trek.”

How many of you here think that if the Abrams team had passed on Trek the studio’s next move would have been to offer the Franchise to someone who would have been more respectful of the details?

I’m thinking Michael Bay.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Here’s something to keep in mind:

According to what’s been reported, a Paramount studio executive first broached the topic of “Star Trek” to one of the now-producers of the movie.

Abrams didn’t ask Paramount; Paramount was clearly looking for a new take on “Star Trek.”

How many of you here think that if the Abrams team had passed on Trek the studio’s next move would have been to offer the Franchise to someone who would have been more respectful of the details?

I’m thinking Michael Bay.

Nah, Ratner or McG are the men to go to these days

 

[datas_cat_spot]

I noticed none of the trailer descriptions say which Linkin Park song is playing in the background.

 

[SalvorHardin]

I noticed none of the trailer descriptions say which Linkin Park song is playing in the background.

That's because they are using Nickelback for this one

 

[steveman]

Here’s something to keep in mind:

According to what’s been reported, a Paramount studio executive first broached the topic of “Star Trek” to one of the now-producers of the movie.

Abrams didn’t ask Paramount; Paramount was clearly looking for a new take on “Star Trek.”

How many of you here think that if the Abrams team had passed on Trek the studio’s next move would have been to offer the Franchise to someone who would have been more respectful of the details?

I’m thinking Michael Bay.

If it had been Bay (or Ratner or McG), I think we can conservatively say that the environment around here would be "toxic."

 

[Tyberius]

Is there a continuity issue with Archer's dog? I don't follow.

If it's Porthos, he's like a hundred years old.

 

[Ovation]

Now, I haven't waded through all the posts in this thread (I can guess who said what pretty well anyway, at this point), but I do think this quotation from Mark Waid (a major comic writer, for those who may not know), speaking about fiction in general, not any specific franchise: "From the time a caveman told the first bedtime story to today, no good fiction ever came out of worrying first and foremost whether its events fit into 'continuity'."

I await the chance to actually see the movie before passing judgement. A novel idea, I know, but maybe, just maybe, actually seeing the film will provide me with enough substance to have an INFORMED opinion about the quality of the film. Just a thought (too radical?).

 

[archeryguy1701]

"From the time a caveman told the first bedtime story to today, no good fiction ever came out of worrying first and foremost whether its events fit into 'continuity'."

Here here!

Entertain me first, and then we'll see if we can't make it fit later.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

"From the time a caveman told the first bedtime story to today, no good fiction ever came out of worrying first and foremost whether its events fit into 'continuity'."

Not only fiction - the Bible's continuity is terrible, but people continue to think very highly of its narrative.

 

[seigezunt]

^ Which fans? Different people have different ideas of what Star Trek is or should be. There have been five different Trek TV shows that someone will call their favorite.

The whiners here who bitch and moan the same song and dance with every post think they're the one true fanbase who knows what Star Trek is all about. Hell, some of those crybabies will watch this movie more times than anyone here who loves it just so they can tell us how right they were!

Exactly. Which Fans.

I've been watching the show since 1973, saw the spinoffs. I'm not pissed, and I'm looking forward to this movie! I'm sick of the pigeon-holing this as a young-vs-old fan thing.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Going back to the "Cardassian Drink" as a continuity error...

The timeline for the Federation knowing of Cardassia's existence is 100% FANON, not canon. There is nothing on-screen that nails down the time that the Federation came in contact with the Cardassians.

On-screen canon trumps all fanon -- even new canon created by this film.

If ST:XI says that the Federation knew about Cardassia in the 23rd Century, and that fact does not contradict any other ON SCREEN canon, then voilá, it is now part of canon.

I think there are many things "fanon" items that this film will both validate (and in turn canonize) and will invalidate.

For example: Kirk's age at the time he took command is not 100% known by canon. Fanon says he was 31-ish, and that seems like a reasonable assumption. But the reality is, we don't know how long after Kirk took command that WNMHGB took place, and we don't even know if Kirk immediately started the 5-year mission after taking command...maybe there was a year between Kirk's ascention to command and the 5-year mission? Who knows?

This film may finally canonize the events surrounding Kirk's taking command and that timeline relative to TOS.

 

[SalvorHardin]

As a matter of fact in DS9 we learned that Tobin Dax met Cardassian poet Iloja on Vulcan in the 22nd century if I'm not mistaken.

So there goes that...The Federation knew about the Cardassians pretty early

Going back to the "Cardassian Drink" as a continuity error...

The timeline for the Federation knowing of Cardassia's existence is 100% FANON, not canon. There is nothing on-screen that nails down the time that the Federation came in contact with the Cardassians.

On-screen canon trumps all fanon -- even new canon created by this film.

If ST:XI says that the Federation knew about Cardassia in the 23rd Century, and that fact does not contradict any other ON SCREEN canon, then voilá, it is now part of canon.

 

[archeryguy1701]

You know... I haven't been in too much more of this forum the past day or two, but last night it just kinda occured to me: the reveal of the Enterprise (at least in this thread) was very anti-climactic. It was literally a, "Hey, here's the Enterprise.", there was a few comments, and then it went right on being ignored. It wasn't the explosion or freak out I was expecting.