a new JIM KIRK?

[RobertScorpio]

No...this new movie is not pushing a new Kirk on us, in terms of character. I have seen some complain about the trailer, and his driving a muscle car..and being rebel. Well, guess what...I saw the trailer and that is how the regular people, meaning not us, see kirk already.

They know that Shatner created a womanizing rule breaker. In fact, from Khan on, the movies seemed to amp up the fact that Kirk was a rule breaker. Koyashu cheating..stealing the Enterprise..ect...They are only playing up aspects that will appeal to NON FANS. And in order for this new Trek movie series to survive, JJ has calculated that only by making Kirk a 'rebel with out a cause' can he attract the young boys, and girls, who have always, since the days of Dean and McQueen, been attracted to such characters....

I, for one, hope they make kirk and even badder ass than he was before. Because it all comes down to this; who would win in a fight between Kirk and Han Solo!!!!

I liked the trailer...I like Pine's take on the character...and I think this movie is going to be the one to beat next summer.

And unless you haven't been paying attention? JJ's main goal is change this UNIVERSAL formula...

TREK + FAN = GEEK


Rob
Scorpio

 

[gastrof]

I pretty easilly accepted James Cawley as Kirk in the NEW VOYAGES fan films.

The ship and all looked identical, we knew the historical facts of their continuity were identical with the real TOS, so it was easy.

Changing the face of the character isn't so much of a traumatic event.

It's the rest of the changes. The apparent ones to the timeline and obvious ones to the ship and tech, that's what bugs me.

Pine will likely do fine as Kirk.

I just wish his ship was more easy to accept as the Enterprise we knew.

 

[SonicRanger]

I don't get bent out of shape when I see two productions of Hamlet with different actors and sets but the same characters and storyline.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I pretty easilly accepted James Cawley as Kirk in the NEW VOYAGES fan films.

The ship and all looked identical, we knew the historical facts of their continuity were identical with the real TOS, so it was easy.

Changing the face of the character isn't so much of a traumatic event.

It's the rest of the changes. The apparent ones to the timeline and obvious ones to the ship and tech, that's what bugs me.

Pine will likely do fine as Kirk.

I just wish his ship was more easy to accept as the Enterprise we knew.

Some of it will be hard to get past..but I have before. I have lived through recasting George Reeves with Christopher....different Batmans...I have lived through several James Bonds, some good/some bad...I have seen remakes of Galactica, and other childhood favorites...and Trek, to me, is no different.

If the ship looks different? I could care-a-less. Because, for me, the Enterprise is not even remotely as important than the characters and story. If the choice was between a bad story/bad characters and the same ship as before? That would be a no brainer...

Star Trek has, for me, always been about the characters. I know there are fans who go the other way, and put FX and ships in front...but I don't. The best FX (TMP) do not guarentee a great movie...

Stories and characters..do..

Rob

 

[gastrof]

I don't get bent out of shape when I see two productions of Hamlet with different actors and sets but the same characters and storyline.

Hamlet isn't an ongoing continuity with a look we've come to know EXACTLY over a period of time.

Hamlet presentations are one timers, with it easily recognized each one is unique.

This is Star Trek. Entirely different.

 

[gastrof]

...If the ship looks different? I could care-a-less. Because, for me, the Enterprise is not even remotely as important than the characters and story. If the choice was between a bad story/bad characters and the same ship as before? That would be a no brainer...

Star Trek has, for me, always been about the characters. I know there are fans who go the other way, and put FX and ships in front...but I don't. The best FX (TMP) do not guarentee a great movie...

Stories and characters..do..

Rob

Well, if the look isn't important, then why change it?

Why not keep it the way we've always known it to be?

Come on.

If they showed you an Enterprise that looked like a modern space rocket, you'd object.

The way things look DOES carry some weight.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I don't get bent out of shape when I see two productions of Hamlet with different actors and sets but the same characters and storyline.

Hamlet isn't an ongoing continuity with a look we've come to know EXACTLY over a period of time.

Hamlet presentations are one timers, with it easily recognized each one is unique.

This is Star Trek. Entirely different.

Star Trek
-Episode titles mostly quoted from Shakespeare

Hamlet Production
-Title written by Shakespeare.

Star Trek
-Quotes Shakespeare a lot.

Hamlet Production
-Quotes Shakespeare a lot.

:P

 

[gastrof]

Star Trek
-Episode titles mostly quoted from Shakespeare

Hamlet Production
-Title written by Shakespeare.

Star Trek
-Quotes Shakespeare a lot.

Hamlet Production
-Quotes Shakespeare a lot.

:P

Hamlet-

One time story, not an ongoing one. Each presentation a new setup by different directors with different set designers, etc.

Star Trek (TOS/Kirk)-

An ongoing storyline with a known look to things that's locked in place and not one-shot deals that can be redressed according to whim without causing people to say "Huh?"

Come on.

I just made the same point above.

You've said nothing to counter such a simple point. They're not the same where continuity elements are concerned.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

They are the same: Kirk, McCoy, Enterprise, etc. Or are we to believe that Starfleet is uncanon because it conflicts with the previously established UESPA? Or dilithium crystals?

 

[gastrof]

They are the same: Kirk, McCoy, Enterprise, etc. Or are we to believe that Starfleet is uncanon because it conflicts with the previously established UESPA? Or dilithium crystals?

They're obviously not the same.

Their ship looks different.

There are "hostess stands" on either side of Kirk's chair. (What stations are they? The TOS ship had no such stations.)

The hand phasers look somewhat like six shooters with little tube shaped barrels.

The badges and rank stripes appear to be silver, not gold.

Kirk apparently meets Pike long before Pike's promotion to Fleet Captain, which took place just as Kirk was being given command of the Enterprise, and Sulu is a helmsman long before he should be.

Gary Mitchell's nowhere in sight, and yet he was apparently Kirk's original first officer.

The uniforms are all wrong for the WNMHGB era.

No.

This is a parallel universe, and if you disagree again, we'll arrange for you to be sent to the Kryptonian Phantom Zone.

Oh...

Sorry...

Wrong fictional universe...

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

The badges and rank stripes appear to be silver, not gold.

THOSE BASTARDS!

 

[darkshadow0001]

I just wish his ship was more easy to accept as the Enterprise we knew.

I think the reason they did this was because of how "cheap" the 60's Enterprise looked and that he (Abrams) may have wanted to bring in new fans to the franchise by updating the ship. The exterior of the ship is still a very similar style, which is a plus in my book. I'm going to overlook all of this and judge on how the movie is, and not nitpick every little thing. Once I see the movie, and IF I don't like it, I'll nitpick then

 

[blaXXer]

Oh, the childhood-raping...

 

[Gibraltar]

Oh, the childhood-raping...

C'mon, people... he's right, relax. It's just a movie. It's a different take on a fictional universe.

 

[ST-One]

I don't get bent out of shape when I see two productions of Hamlet with different actors and sets but the same characters and storyline.

Hamlet isn't an ongoing continuity with a look we've come to know EXACTLY over a period of time.

Hamlet presentations are one timers, with it easily recognized each one is unique.

This is Star Trek. Entirely different.

Now, no more.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

No...this new movie is not pushing a new Kirk on us, in terms of character. I have seen some complain about the trailer, and his driving a muscle car..and being rebel. Well, guess what...I saw the trailer and that is how the regular people, meaning not us, see kirk already.

Since when did Trek fans not see Kirk as a rebel? Picard's the by-the-book guy, and he was set up as such specifically to distinguish him from Kirk, who was continually breaking minor rules like, oh THE PRIME DIRECTIVE.

And I hate to tell you this but, by saying this:

Because it all comes down to this; who would win in a fight between Kirk and Han Solo!!!!

You are not helping with this.

JJ's main goal is change this UNIVERSAL formula...

TREK + FAN = GEEK

 

[maryh]

This will be an unpopular view but I see TOS Kirk as a man of integrity and honor as are ALL the characters, and this was their driving force.

IMO Kirk was more of a Man of LaManche who believed in what he was doing and was willing to die for what he believed in. He was a pretty by the book guy who would flex only if the rules conflicted with his honor or his beliefs. As I think of Trek's most popular episodes, Kirk is not the renegade, womanizing, bad ass as he has become. I was never a big Kirk fan but I did like and respect the his idealism and integrity. Seems nobody has focussed on this defining aspect of Kirk - perhaps as a knee-jerk reaction to the boring Jean-Luc, but Kirk was a serious guy dedicated to duty, the Federation, and humanity. I enjoy Kirk's passion, feisty nature and bravery, but without the integrity I'll be disappointed.

This inspiration is what may be lacking for me in this movie. I hope I'm wrong, for I have no desire to watch a bad ass Kirk worship piece. I hope they didn't screw up Spock either - another man of integrity.

 

[Strekrules]

Considering Time Travel will destroy the timeline in this flick, all bets are off =)

I know it's been denied a thousand times by J.J. & Shatner...but I still wouldn't be too surprised to see Old Spock find Old Kirk in the TNG-era "Present" after the credits are over.....

 

[seigezunt]

Considering Time Travel will destroy the timeline in this flick, all bets are off =)

I know it's been denied a thousand times by J.J. & Shatner...but I still wouldn't be too surprised to see Old Spock find Old Kirk in the TNG-era "Present" after the credits are over.....

the music swells.... and they kiss.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

This will be an unpopular view but I see TOS Kirk as a man of integrity and honor as are ALL the characters, and this was their driving force.

IMO Kirk was more of a Man of LaManche who believed in what he was doing and was willing to die for what he believed in. He was a pretty by the book guy who would flex only if the rules conflicted with his honor or his beliefs. As I think of Trek's most popular episodes, Kirk is not the renegade, womanizing, bad ass as he has become. I was never a big Kirk fan but I did like and respect the his idealism and integrity. Seems nobody has focussed on this defining aspect of Kirk - perhaps as a knee-jerk reaction to the boring Jean-Luc, but Kirk was a serious guy dedicated to duty, the Federation, and humanity. I enjoy Kirk's passion, feisty nature and bravery, but without the integrity I'll be disappointed.

Kirk is indeed a man of integrity, but he is decidedly not rule-bound. He complains of bureacracy, and defies orders for friendship (Amok Time) as well as when they conflict with his fundamental judgment of right and wrong (The Apple). Granted, during TOS he was a military man, and respected the hierarchical structure of Starfleet, but it always seemed that had as much to do with maintaining his own authority as respecting the authority of his superiors. One cannot captain a ship of hundreds far from home for extended periods of time without a pretty strict hierarchy.

One of the most interesting analyses I ever read of Kirk looked at the many contradictions contained within the character. Personally, I think it's why he has become such an enduring icon. Sure, pop culture has had a good deal of fun with Jimmy boy, but he still speaks to many.

This inspiration is what may be lacking for me in this movie. I hope I'm wrong, for I have no desire to watch a bad ass Kirk worship piece. I hope they didn't screw up Spock either - another man of integrity.

Considering that we know next to nothing about how the character will be handled in the movie, it's just too early to make any calls one way or the other. I have great fears that this film will be of the ilk of the last ten years of Trek writing (i.e. shallow and stupid), but the trailer is so obviously a marketing effort to draw people in (which is what a trailer should be) I can't say as it worries me particularly.