• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have Wa

What kind of Star Trek movie would you have wanted?

  • The same premise with vital improvements

    Votes: 6 23.1%
  • A TNG movie

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • A DS9 movie

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • A Voyager movie

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • An Enterprise movie

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • A crossover movie with cast members from TNG, Voyager and DS9

    Votes: 6 23.1%
  • A movie featuring a new crew

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • A straight TOS reboot

    Votes: 3 11.5%
  • Something else

    Votes: 5 19.2%

  • Total voters
    26
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

I liked the movie and didn't vote. If the intention was to make a film set in the TOS era with the same crew, I don't think I can find fault with the decisions made. Sure there were parts I didn't like, but I'm not clever enough to propose an alternative.

If the entire premise were to be ditched, then I would want something set after 2400. I would want the entire universe reimagined. I would want Trek to seem alien, as alien as the future really would be given the rate of technological and social advances portrayed. I would want a movie that is unrecognizable as Star Trek, in which you would only discover that it's Star Trek over the course of the movie. I would want a movie that would challenge our assumptions about science fiction, about what is possible.

But if Star Trek is destined to remain space cowboys, then I think the producers made the right choices.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

In the spirit of the Great Engineers, why reboot when you can repair? Or, ohhh, shiny upgrades!

-Aesthetic/ directorial subtlety akin to Sunshine, (for example :D )
-A plot that doesn't quite so much resemble a screaming descent through various levels of referential/ bromance hell,
-Honest, likeable gay characters (dare to dream?) with layers of intelligent, insightful persona,
-A chance to see parts of the ST Universe previously alluded to, the difficult aspects: Utopian Earth (Regions other than Europe/ USA), Romulus outside of Dartha, Betazed, Bolarus, etc. I'd even settle for a fully fleshed out Starbase interior.
-Insight, suggestion and debate- whether obvious or implied, about the human condition beyond male competition or simplistic romance. How about exploring, with honest acceptance, the underplayed elements of a body as vast as the Federation: cultural/ territorial/ scientific imperialism, the reality of violent capitalism lapping at the apparent, bountiful Utopia of the Core Worlds. Hell, sexism, religious bias and sexuality: how often do they extensively explore these themes?

Just a few points :bolian:, unrealistic a wishlist as they might form. It was just so deeply, painfully lacking.

:guffaw: Have I dug too far?
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

I did like the film. It kept me entertained for a couple of hours, and I'll enjoy owning the DVD. That said, I would have rather had a prequel that didn't violate the canon that's been building for 43 years. I would like to have learned something new about the same characters I've known and invested so much time in, and not the "alternate reality" doubles.
For me, as much as I enjoyed it, the whole film was more of a "what if?"
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

Straight TOS reboot

- with sets and models that more resemble the old ones
Why? The old ones looked like TV sets from the 1960's. My living room has more technology in it than the 1960's version of the Enterprise.

- with more aliens
How many aliens do you want to service in one movie? There were aliens, starting from the Arex looking guy on the Kelvin, to Scotty's little friend on Delta Vega/Enterprise

- with a better story
Subjective. I think they needed to shake things up. Trek has been stagnate

I've been watching STAR TREK since the original episodes aired. I wanted to be Captain Kirk. I watched NEXT GENERATION, DS9, VOYAGER and ENTERPRISE. I like them all for what they were, extensions of the STAR TREK world(s). You can't make a movie in 2009 like you're making it in 1969, or 79 or 89. Movie making (and audiences) is different now. You want to be a viable movie franchise, you have to get asses into seats. A cerebral TREK won't do it. A Michael Bay TREK won't either. JJ gave us something in between. I await ST XII eagerly.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

Straight TOS reboot

- with sets and models that more resemble the old ones
Why? The old ones looked like TV sets from the 1960's. My living room has more technology in it than the 1960's version of the Enterprise.
If you were doing a full on prequel, they'd have to look like the 60s sets. Enterprise managed to use them just fine without them being embarrassing. A full reboot though, they can do whatever they want.
I think they needed to shake things up. Trek has been stagnate
How has it been shaken up? Kirk and Spock fly around in the Enterprise saving the day. How is that any different to how it was?
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

Straight TOS reboot

- with sets and models that more resemble the old ones
Why? The old ones looked like TV sets from the 1960's. My living room has more technology in it than the 1960's version of the Enterprise.
I didn't mean 1:1 of course...
But a good synethesis between TOS design elements and contemporary designs and functionality would have been cool in my opinion.
As it is, it's something completely new. And the old designs weren't at all bad, while some of the new designs were shitty and cheap-looking (Engineering)
I know that was on purpose. But that makes it even worse, and the alleged need for a redesign "because this is 2009" even more questionable. o

- with more aliens
How many aliens do you want to service in one movie? There were aliens, starting from the Arex looking guy on the Kelvin, to Scotty's little friend on Delta Vega/Enterprise
There is always the danger of having a Muppet Show.
But I would have liked the "new Federation" to reflect more that it's a multicultural interstellar alliance, not some "Homo Sapiens Club" with a few aliens thrown in. This was the time to do it, but they chose not to.
This is still "your daddy's Star Trek", but with more lens flares, faster cuts, less plot and a new cast.

- with a better story
Subjective. I think they needed to shake things up. Trek has been stagnate
I agree. But the story was weak.

EDIT: The quotes are all fucked up lol, sorry [I think I've got them sorted now. - M']
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

Straight TOS reboot

- with sets and models that more resemble the old ones
Why? The old ones looked like TV sets from the 1960's. My living room has more technology in it than the 1960's version of the Enterprise.
If you were doing a full on prequel, they'd have to look like the 60s sets. Enterprise managed to use them just fine without them being embarrassing. A full reboot though, they can do whatever they want.
I think they needed to shake things up. Trek has been stagnate
How has it been shaken up? Kirk and Spock fly around in the Enterprise saving the day. How is that any different to how it was?

Besides the obvious that the dynamics between these people is different, oh, I don't know, Vulcan was blown up, Amanda's dead, George is dead (prematurely), Pike is not paralyzed, you know, little things like that. Oh, and we (the Federation) know that Romulus will be dust in 129 years.

And ENTERPRISE was a TV show. Movie sets are built to much more detail and frankly, as I said, my living room looks more high-tech than the 1960's bridge. I don't want to see backward thinking. Believe me, if Gene were alive and doing this, besides shooting JFK, he'd go for the same thing, forward looking change in aesthetics. Only he'd have shorter skirts and full nude green chicks. :)
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

And ENTERPRISE was a TV show. Movie sets are built to much more detail and frankly, as I said, my living room looks more high-tech than the 1960's bridge. I don't want to see backward thinking. Believe me, if Gene were alive and doing this, besides shooting JFK, he'd go for the same thing, forward looking change in aesthetics. Only he'd have shorter skirts and full nude green chicks. :)

I think he was referring to (correct me if I'm wrong) the appearance of the 23rd Century Defiant in 'In a Mirror Darkly' which was an Enterprise episode, and it's interiors (since I'd be surprised if the original sets were still around, I'd say they were rebuilt). IMO, the sets looked...garish, I think is the word, and I'm glad we've moved away from it. YMMV, however.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

oh, I don't know, Vulcan was blown up, Amanda's dead, George is dead (prematurely), Pike is not paralyzed, you know, little things like that.
Oh, and we (the Federation) know that Romulus will be dust in 129 years.
Could Vulcan not have been blown up in the existing Trek universe? Same goes for a couple of bit part characters biting the dust.
And ENTERPRISE was a TV show. Movie sets are built to much more detail
4th Season of Enterprise was filmed in HD.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

You can always click on edit and delete your own post ;)
Or he'd be able to, if only he had 600 more posts than he does. ;) I've taken care of it.

Ahh, I did not remember that. :alienblush:
Hmm... I did not know that either. I know that when I tried I could not delete posts, so I never tried again.:vulcan: How does one learn all this stuff?! I am still trying to figure out some of the abbreviations... newest one YMMV... WTF is that?
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary. It's a shorthand way of saying that different people will have different opinions about or different reactions to any given thing.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

I liked the new movie, but for the next one, I'd turn the TOS references up to 11.

Have Janice Rand, Xon, Christine Chapel, M'Ress, Arex, and Will Decker join as bridge officers.
More TOS sound effects
Redone TOS premises. For example, I'd love to see Devil In The Dark or Arena done for the big screen.
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

I seldom post in this forum anymore, but in this case, I can't resist the desire to post this...

1) No time travel.
2) No "2-dimensions, mustache-twirling villain.".
3) Only three four major TOS characters (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott).
4) No major redesigns... rather, "polished" versions of things we already know.
5) Minimal presence of the Enterprise in the movie.
6) More characterization.
7) No "cheap shock ploy" of destroying a major world... Alderaan or Vulcan.

My version of this movie would have started with George Kirk on board his ship (for consistency, let's call it the USS Kelvin). He's on a subspace communication line to Earth, talking to his family... Winona, his wife, Sam, his elder son,and Jim, who would be twelve years old. During that communication, the Kelvin encounters something dangerous... ideally something related to what comes later... and communications are lost. George Kirk makes his way to his post, and we see something very much as we saw in the film, except for no "Jim being born" stuff. He gives his life to save the escaping crew and to (temporarily) overcome the problem which risks everyone's life.

We would then cut to Vulcan, where we'd see pretty much the same early Spock scenes. (I'd have made Vulcan more consistent with the Vulcan we know, however... sky color, for instance).

Another cut, to Earth, where an unidentified Starfleet officer (who would,in a "fanboy moment," be identified as Pike... though Jim Kirk wouldn't notice that at the time) delivers the news that George Kirk was killed in the line of duty. Jim Kirk goes stoney... and stays that way for years. (It'll be this movie where we see him start to break out of his hardened shell.)

Cut to Vulcan again... and the young-adult Spock turning down the Vulcan Science Academy appointment... but without the same "Screw you" tone that seemed so out-of-character to me. Think more of Nimoy's treatment of T'Pring at the end of "Amok Time." Totally cold and dismissive.

Next, a shot of Jim Kirk as an academy upperclassman... hard, unyielding, driven to the point of being a martinette. Several of his instructors are reviewing him, along with a few serving line officers. Among these are John Gill, Aaron Stone, and Kirk's academic advisor, Ben Finney. They agree to give him a starship assignment, but express concerns that he doesn't have the "flexibility" needed to serve in command. Captain Pike is present and argues that he sees something there, however.

Flash forward... and Lieutenant Kirk is returning to the Academy for his Command Course. Part of this involves teaching underclassmen at the academy (think "graduate assistant). This would permit some exposure as cameos for known characters (Sulu, Uhura) as his students, and we might see a young Pavel Chekov arriving for his first day aboard the same shuttle as Kirk. Kirk would see the Enterprise as they arrive, and would comment to the young recruit that there was nothing he wanted more than the command of a ship like the Enterprise.

Kirk was assigned to this course on the recommendation of Captain Garrovick, immediately prior to his death. Kirk, who had mellowed over time, is tortured over this and is hardening again. He's become a "walking stack of books with legs."

A few months pass, and Kirk is preparing to undergo one of the "Command School" tests... the Kobayashi Maru. Kirk would discuss this with his friend, senior underclassman Gary Mitchell, who would mention to Kirk that he needed to hook him up with this cute blonde lab technician he'd met, and that Kirk just needed to lighten up and accept that sometimes you just don't win... after all, "we're not gods, are we?" Kirk proves his skill by reprogramming the "respawn enemy vessels" mode of the simulation (which is what makes it unwinnable) to fail. Kirk fights through the scenario, and after defeating a three-to-one fight, is able to rescue the crew of the Maru. The ONLY thing Kirk did was remove the "cheat" from the program... no "smug asshole" tone from him like we got in this movie. Rather, we see him breaking his "by the book" pattern... and that's what gets him the commendation.

Immediately after this is the "evaluation cruise." Kirk was bucking to get a cruise on the Enterprise, under Pike, but while some of the Academy staff approve of his "Kobayashi Maru" solution (even so much as managing to get him a commendation), a few are still hostile to him over that, and one of those is the one responsible for assigning ships for the cruise. Instead of getting assigned to the Enterprise, Kirk gets assigned to an old police cutter. The Academy "evaluator" on this particular ship is a very competent but very unpopular officer, the only Vulcan in Starfleet... Spock.

(At this point, we're about 1 hour into the movie, by the way.)

During the cruise, Kirk and Spock "rub each other wrong," for reasons we can imagine from the TOS characters' personality traits. However, unlike in the new movie, they handle things in a very professional manner... the tension is actually stronger that way (think about how Kirk dealt with the ambassador in "The Galileo 7.")

During the cruise, this ship (let's call it the "Peregrin") receives a distress signal from a civilian vessel. Kirk recognizes the interference patterns in the distress signal, just before losing the signal, as being what he'd seen when his father died. He and Spock come into conflict over how to handle the situation... "by the book" or "by my guts." Kirk, who's usually thought of as being "by the book," instead is reacting purely "by my gut."

The Peregrine arrives, and is hit by the same "event" that has struck the civilian vessel... resulting in the bridge of the Peregrin being destroyed, killing the senior officers and leaving Kirk and Spock as the two most senior officers aboard. Kirk prevails, but not without ongoing opposition, as he's the "command school" officer (while Spock thinks that he's the logical choice).

The Peregrine, itself damaged, now has to deal with rescuing the civilian ship, a massive passenger liner, and saving itself as well.

Arriving aboard the liner, they encounter the ship's civilian engineer, a former starfleet officer named Montgomery Scott. They also find a disillusioned civilian doctor, on his way off-planet after a particularly ugly divorce, named Leonard McCoy, helping to deal with casualties.

The technical details don't matter... suffice it to say that Kirk's command skills, Spock's logic and analytical capabilities, and Scott's technical talents combine to save the personnel aboard both vessels, while McCoy and Kirk bond, Kirk and Spock develop a strong mutual respect, and Scott becomes known to Kirk as a "miracle worker."

At the end, Kirk is granted a position as first officer of the USS Alexander, a destroyer-class ship... and Scott decides to rejoin Starfleet, asking if Kirk thinks the Alexander could use an old engineer... and McCoy realizes that Starfleet (and men like those he'd just met) could give his life meaning again.

As Kirk is preparing to report to the Alexander, he encounters Spock, who is preparing to return to his assignment aboard the Enterprise, under Captain Pike. There is a "warm" moment between them.

During the final scene, we see the Alexander leaving orbit, and Kirk is making a log entry. The Alexander flies past the Enterprise on the way, as Kirk talks about his optimism about the future ahead of him.

THAT is the movie I would have made. No "villain." No tossing out history (but no slavish "fanboy moments" either). Different design work, because we'd be seeing different ships... but we'd see the familiar designs as well. No "everything happens at one moment and stays that way forever after, amen."

The next movie could be about Kirk taking command of the Enterprise. We'd have Kirk, Spock, Scott, and Sulu from the original characters... plus Gary Mitchell.

If there was a third movie, we'd have the entire TOS "crew" present, serving on the TOS (ish) Enterprise, at some point between WNMHGB and the beginning of Season 1. (Chekov might be there, but not as a bridge crew member.)
 
Re: Poll: To Those That Disliked It: What Kind of Movie Would You Have

^I would have liked that.
And why aren't you posting here, anymore, Cary?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top