darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
If TPTB don't recognize it then it isn't "official." And since I don't give a shit about much after 1979 all I can say is
Then stop posting.
I'm sick of JJ Hater crap!
Haynes Enterprise Manual? ... Part Two...
- Thread starter DaveyNY
- Start date
Then stop posting.
I'm sick of JJ Hater crap!
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
^^
Too bad. I don't give a shit about that either. If you don't like dissenting opinions then don't post here.
There's dissenting opinons, then there's what you and CRA
do, namely turn every thread where 09 Trek comes up into a bash/defend-a-thon.
It's not just old, it's dated...in fact, it's carbon dated. You don't like JJ Trek. We get it. You can stop hijacking every JJ Trek thread to remind us about it.
Like I said. Too bad, so sad. Cry me a river. Our opinions are just as valid as anyone's and can be reiterated as often as anyone embracing something we disagree with. If you insist on calling dissenters haters then you have to expect that they might call you something in return.^^
Too bad. I don't give a shit about that either. If you don't like dissenting opinions then don't post here.
There's dissenting opinons, then there's what you and CRA
do, namely turn every thread where 09 Trek comes up into a bash/defend-a-thon.
It's not just old, it's dated...in fact, it's carbon dated. You don't like JJ Trek. We get it. You can stop hijacking every JJ Trek thread to remind us about it.
^ Fair enough with regards to your post regarding picking what you want to be canon with concern to schematics and technical data...I've no problem with that...I do it myself all the time. I also have no problem with having a strong differing opinion it is just I thought your post was rather...aggressive is all. I'm a big fan of sci-fi technical manuals so this topic interests me as does fan work.
Also to the poster who made the comment about fans already forgetting the movie...I'm not sure what you meant but that. Its on my mind all the time and I've watched and enjoyed it over a half dozen times and very much looking forward to the sequel and the possibility of a new tech manual on the movie Enterprise.
Also to the poster who made the comment about fans already forgetting the movie...I'm not sure what you meant but that. Its on my mind all the time and I've watched and enjoyed it over a half dozen times and very much looking forward to the sequel and the possibility of a new tech manual on the movie Enterprise.
^^ I think the reference is in regard to ST09 having lasting impact. It's an open question because today sensations are here today and gone this afternoon...or at least tomorrow. This is in comparison with the sheer weight of what has come before in Trek. Also TOS has cemented itself in the collective conscience for over forty years. A couple of rebooted movies may well not be able to make a dent in that.
Also consider how many versions of A Christmas Carol have been made and yet it's the 1951 version that's widely accepted as the best and most definitive. Nigel Rathbone is still considered by many as the quintessential Sherlock Holmes and Holmes has been done many times.
Also consider how many versions of A Christmas Carol have been made and yet it's the 1951 version that's widely accepted as the best and most definitive. Nigel Rathbone is still considered by many as the quintessential Sherlock Holmes and Holmes has been done many times.
That's a specious claim at best.
Most people who do know about Sherlock Holmes have never seen and don't remember Rathbone as Holmes, and would probably be surprised to find out that so many Holmes movies had been made setting the character in the contemporary world of the time rather than in his "proper" setting of the late Victorian era (only two of Rathbone's films were respectful of the canon). For most folks, Holmes remains the 19th century figure in the deerstalker cap.
One might argue that most people who remember Rathbone at all remember him best for his Holmes films, but it's nonsense to claim the reverse - that he represents the "definitive Holmes" to anyone other than a dwindling group of old film buffs.
The Haynes people are smart to launch a Trek tech publication aimed at the current audience for a currently successful film - this is what merchandising is all about, after all, and why anyone pays for such a license - rather than attempting one more time to service a declining number of traditional fans who've demonstrated a diminishing willingness to buy Trek technical manuals by printing one more knockoff/variation on an old, old song.
Most people who do know about Sherlock Holmes have never seen and don't remember Rathbone as Holmes, and would probably be surprised to find out that so many Holmes movies had been made setting the character in the contemporary world of the time rather than in his "proper" setting of the late Victorian era (only two of Rathbone's films were respectful of the canon). For most folks, Holmes remains the 19th century figure in the deerstalker cap.
One might argue that most people who remember Rathbone at all remember him best for his Holmes films, but it's nonsense to claim the reverse - that he represents the "definitive Holmes" to anyone other than a dwindling group of old film buffs.
The Haynes people are smart to launch a Trek tech publication aimed at the current audience for a currently successful film - this is what merchandising is all about, after all, and why anyone pays for such a license - rather than attempting one more time to service a declining number of traditional fans who've demonstrated a diminishing willingness to buy Trek technical manuals by printing one more knockoff/variation on an old, old song.
Hell, the Holmes I remember the best is Jeremy Brett, but I still enjoyed the hell outta Downey's version.
Brett may currently be the most widely seen and best remembered version of Holmes. I haven't yet seen the Downey film but I want to.
We're Star Trek fans, WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MINORITY!
Do you seriously think attempting to use peer pressure even has a snowball's chance in hell of making anything resembling a difference?
Well, over in Lit they have a cover posted and it looks like it's gonna cover every Enterprise from the NX-01 to the 1701-E and JJ's Enterprise.
I'm looking forward to it.
I'm looking forward to it.
Thanks for the link...wow...this is more than i could have hoped for. I'm curious about what they mean by a re-interrupted 2009 Enterprise?
They don't. They say that the TOS Enterprise was reinterpreted for the 2009 film.
dJE
The way I read it, it's *not* going to cover the JJ Enterprise. Under the Key Content section on the cover, it says "NCC-1701 (Original TV series plus Star Trek: The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan and The Search for Spock, in which it was destroyed. A reinterpreted version of this Enterprise featured in the 2009 film)."
Similar threads
