"Admit it's a reboot!!!" Who cares, really.

[SalvorHardin]

In short, JJ and Co. have been lying through their teeth about what they're doing from the beginning, and they are continuing to lie to us every time they trot out this "not really a reboot" crap! Not only is this blatantly dishonest, it's also disrespectful of the fanbase....

OMFG!!!!!! Are there any authorities we can alert? This guy sounds like a monster and must be brought to justice!!!! So mad right now.

Snide comments aside, why can't they just tell the truth?

Maybe because what you believe is the truth is not actually the truth ?

They have an advantage none of us have. And that is knowing absolutely everything about the movie and it's story.
We won't have that until May.

So maybe they are actually onto something when they claim it is not a reboot.
Who knows.

Just a thought...

 

[-Brett-]

Because they've gone through a very elaborate, and tedious, song and dance about how it isn't a reboot and that "there's a canon explanation for everything". At this point, it's looking like that "canon explanation" is that canon has been wiped out.

In short, JJ and Co. have been lying through their teeth about what they're doing from the beginning, and they are continuing to lie to us every time they trot out this "not really a reboot" crap! Not only is this blatantly dishonest, it's also disrespectful of the fanbase to such a degree that, had he tried this crap in the not-too-distant past, there would've been protests outside the Paramount gates with JJ being burned in effigy.

What I really find dismaying is that so many so-called fans are not only okay with being lied to, they're actually applauding this fraud.

i agree with you, and think the rational of many fans is that "bad" trek is better than no trek! i don't subscibe to that but many trek fans i know are of that mindset.

I suspect that most fans would agree that bad Trek is not better than no Trek. Voyager and Enterprise's lack of popularity among fans is evidence of that.

Where some disagree is the notion that this movie will be bad based on a series of wild assumptions and obsessive-compulsive nitpicks.

 

[trekkerguy]

OMFG!!!!!! Are there any authorities we can alert? This guy sounds like a monster and must be brought to justice!!!! So mad right now.

Snide comments aside, why can't they just tell the truth?

Maybe because what you believe is the truth is not actually the truth ?

They have an advantage none of us have. And that is knowing absolutely everything about the movie and it's story.
We won't have that until May.

So maybe they are actually onto something when they claim it is not a reboot.
Who knows.

Just a thought...

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

 

[Red Ranger]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. J.J. Abrams raped my second childhood. Boo-freaking-hoo! -- RR

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

When the plaque was made and the bridge first constructed, the intention was that the Enterprise and her sisters were Starship-class vessels. Backstage production memos confirm this (see Whitfield's book).

They quickly and quietly dropped that, and the term "starship" became a generic ship descriptor for type, rather than a class name.

Damn, those TOS producers clearly had no respect for continuity or the intelligence of the fans.

 

[Australis]

Waitwaitwait! San Fran?! Doesn't that mean it was built on Earth??!!

Coz that name on the plaque is WHERE it was built! Ent-D sez sumfin like 'Urban Planitia Shipyardz'!

ZOMFG! They've violated their own canon!! Or something!! ZOMG!! ZOMFG!!

 

[archeryguy1701]

Because they've gone through a very elaborate, and tedious, song and dance about how it isn't a reboot and that "there's a canon explanation for everything". At this point, it's looking like that "canon explanation" is that canon has been wiped out.

In short, JJ and Co. have been lying through their teeth about what they're doing from the beginning, and they are continuing to lie to us every time they trot out this "not really a reboot" crap! Not only is this blatantly dishonest, it's also disrespectful of the fanbase to such a degree that, had he tried this crap in the not-too-distant past, there would've been protests outside the Paramount gates with JJ being burned in effigy.

What I really find dismaying is that so many so-called fans are not only okay with being lied to, they're actually applauding this fraud.

i agree with you, and think the rational of many fans is that "bad" trek is better than no trek! i don't subscibe to that but many trek fans i know are of that mindset.

The problem with this statement is that good and bad are subjective. So, unfortunately, if someone hates a show or movie, they are willing to make that statement of, "So you're some of those crappy fans who think bad Trek is better than no Trek." There are cases where that statement can be made with some validity, but people are too willing to just use it to condemn those who like things that they don't.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The problem with this statement is that good and bad are subjective. So, unfortunately, if someone hates a show or movie, they are willing to make that statement of, "So you're some of those crappy fans who think bad Trek is better than no Trek." There are cases where that statement can be made with some validity, but people are too willing to just use it to condemn those who like things that they don't.

This post should be nailed up over the door of the BBS.

 

[Vigilance]

The problem is, reboot/no reboot isn't a black and white thing.

I think Abrams and Co. mean it when they say it's not a reboot.

They just don't think that means they have to adhere slavishly to every line of dialogue in every episode, things fans ASSUMED that were never even stated in an episode (like the Enterprise being built in space), or whether the hallways are bright and well lit or grey and dim.

For example, look at what happened with Klingons between the TV show and the movies.

Does that constitute a reboot? By the standards of "the bridge was gray now its white!" then the answer is probably yes.

 

[Disco Bones]

I suspect that most fans would agree that bad Trek is not better than no Trek. Voyager and Enterprise's lack of popularity among fans is evidence of that.

Booo.

Coto-era Enterprise was way better than the rest of the series and arguably good.

 

[trekkerguy]

I suspect that most fans would agree that bad Trek is not better than no Trek. Voyager and Enterprise's lack of popularity among fans is evidence of that.

Booo.

Coto-era Enterprise was way better than the rest of the series and arguably good.

I agree though I don't feel ENT or VOY were bad Trek at all. His point is moot.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

You know, the idea that at least PARTS of the ship might've been built on Earth then lifted into orbit ISN'T that new...I think it's even mentioned in Whitfield's book...

 

[Disco Bones]

I suspect that most fans would agree that bad Trek is not better than no Trek. Voyager and Enterprise's lack of popularity among fans is evidence of that.

Booo.

Coto-era Enterprise was way better than the rest of the series and arguably good.

I agree though I don't feel ENT or VOY were bad Trek at all. His point is moot.

I would have preferred that early ENT leaned more towards Federation building and setting the scene for the Romulan War. But in a rare development for the forums, I RESPECT YOUR OPINION.

 

[trekkerguy]

Booo.

Coto-era Enterprise was way better than the rest of the series and arguably good.

I agree though I don't feel ENT or VOY were bad Trek at all. His point is moot.

I would have preferred that early ENT leaned more towards Federation building and setting the scene for the Romulan War. But in a rare development for the forums, I RESPECT YOUR OPINION.

Thank you, and I yours.
I was saying the poster whom you qouted's point was moot due to it being a matter of opinion.

I would have loved to see ENT run just like you mention, and Coto's was the best of it.
But we have what we do, and it ain't bad. Just not the best.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I agree though I don't feel ENT or VOY were bad Trek at all. His point is moot.

I would have preferred that early ENT leaned more towards Federation building and setting the scene for the Romulan War. But in a rare development for the forums, I RESPECT YOUR OPINION.

Thank you, and I yours.
I was saying the poster whom you qouted's point was moot due to it being a matter of opinion.

I would have loved to see ENT run just like you mention, and Coto's was the best of it.
But we have what we do, and it ain't bad. Just not the best.

And Coto's best was some of the best Trek done in the last 2 decades hands down (except MAYBE for the last 3-4 seasons of DS9)!

 

[Red Ranger]

OK, I ADMIT IT! IT'S A REEEEEBOOOOTTT!

 

[trekkerguy]

I would have preferred that early ENT leaned more towards Federation building and setting the scene for the Romulan War. But in a rare development for the forums, I RESPECT YOUR OPINION.

Thank you, and I yours.
I was saying the poster whom you qouted's point was moot due to it being a matter of opinion.

I would have loved to see ENT run just like you mention, and Coto's was the best of it.
But we have what we do, and it ain't bad. Just not the best.

And Coto's best was some of the best Trek done in the last 2 decades hands down (except MAYBE for the last 3-4 seasons of DS9)!

Mmmm ok. That I'll agree with. Though I have nothing against the first 3 seasons or so of DS9.
And TNG trumps all in my book.

 

[Biggshow]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. J.J. Abrams raped my second childhood. Boo-freaking-hoo! -- RR

I wondered why my butt was sore.

Hmmm...there was a line in front of me a moment ago and now it's behind me...

 

[Disco Bones]

Thank you, and I yours.
I was saying the poster whom you qouted's point was moot due to it being a matter of opinion.

I would have loved to see ENT run just like you mention, and Coto's was the best of it.
But we have what we do, and it ain't bad. Just not the best.

And Coto's best was some of the best Trek done in the last 2 decades hands down (except MAYBE for the last 3-4 seasons of DS9)!

Mmmm ok. That I'll agree with. Though I have nothing against the first 3 seasons or so of DS9.
And TNG trumps all in my book.

I got the point of your mooting, thx.

I have to agree with the Duck though about early DS9. It did get much better, though.

I could take a pass on Voyager. And NEM. And INS, come to think of it.

 

[trekkerguy]

And Coto's best was some of the best Trek done in the last 2 decades hands down (except MAYBE for the last 3-4 seasons of DS9)!

Mmmm ok. That I'll agree with. Though I have nothing against the first 3 seasons or so of DS9.
And TNG trumps all in my book.

I got the point of your mooting, thx.

I have to agree with the Duck though about early DS9. It did get much better, though.

I could take a pass on Voyager. And NEM. And INS, come to think of it.

As long as you leave em there for me.