Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoilers)

[Rarewolf]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

Obsidian Order said:
star trek ended with voyager.

Wrong.

Hell, I say it ended with TNG, skipped a couple of years and then came back as "Enterprise."

I would be as silly and wrong to insist upon that idiosyncratic interpretation as I would be to insist that "it ended with "Voyager" - but not one jot more so.

It ceased going forward with 'Nemesis'. After Voyager all except Nemesis pressed rewind and claimed to do everything first.

 

[cwalrus2]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

I just hope they don't go along with that Kirk bad-boy persona. I thought it was established that Kirk was a bit of a bookworm in the academy and he loosened up considerably after graduating (kind of the opposite of Picard who became more disciplined after graduating). I forgot where it was mentioned. I'm pretty sure it was Gary Mitchell in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" who said that Kirk was a bit of a bookworm in the academy, but I'm not positive.

 

[MANT!]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Damn reminds me of the leaked script for "Empire Strikes Back" that had the final confrontation on the Wookies home plenet, and Luke and Leia ending up hitched... wrong on soo many levels... I'm simply gonna wait for official releases and See the freakin movie before I pass judgement..

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Rarewolf said:
It ceased going forward with 'Nemesis'.

If you say so. "Star Trek" was never about "going forward," no matter how much the revisionists and Keepers of The Holy Flame of Roddenberry repeat that tired canard.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

Rarewolf said:
It ceased going forward with 'Nemesis'.

If you say so. "Star Trek" was never about "going forward," no matter how much the revisionists and Keepers of The Holy Flame of Roddenberry repeat that tired canard.

Star Trek is very much about going forward, just not necessarily going forward chronologically. I've never understood that insistence by the fans, either.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Samuel T. Cogley said:
Star Trek is very much about going forward, just not necessarily going forward chronologically.

Well, yeah, but I think that's implicit after the fifty million posts we've seen on this subject - the "going forward" complaint, whether it comes from George Takei or someone posting on TrekBBS, is a criticism of the chronological setting 99.4 percent of the time.

In a general sense, everything in life is about "going forward." In practice, most of Trek since 1979 has been about going around in narrative circles.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:
In practice, most of Trek since 1979 has been about going around in narrative circles.

With each circle slightly smaller than the last, and ultimately hovering dangerously close to the drain.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Samuel T. Cogley said:
hovering dangerously close to the drain.

"Hovering?"

Dude, it done gone down the tubes. JJ Abrams is the Trek RotoRooter man.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

Samuel T. Cogley said:
hovering dangerously close to the drain.

"Hovering?"

Dude, it done gone down the tubes. JJ Abrams is the Trek RotoRooter man.

I was trying to be kind. I won't let it happen again.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Well, Trek went down the tubes in 1969 too. Liking or not liking "Nemesis" and "Enterprise" is a matter of opinion; recognizing them as failing in their commercial objectives is not.

 

[Aragorn]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Obsidian Order said:
star trek ended with voyager.

You one of those standup Trek comedians?

 

[cooleddie74]

AICN is popular and heavily trafficked, but far from 100% accurate at times. I'll hold out judgment until we get more official news from the studio and filmmakers.

 

[Admiral James Kirk]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Aragorn said:

Obsidian Order said:
star trek ended with voyager.

You one of those standup Trek comedians? [/quote}

Quality Trek ended with the first airing of Caretaker and never recovered. Voyager was Paramount's way of pissing in something to make it better.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Admiral James Kirk said:
Quality Trek ended with the first airing of Caretaker and never recovered.

Of course it didn't. It is true, though, that the audience started losing interest in Trek with the premiere of DS9.

So, the new movie won't follow the visual design of TOS - the new Enterprise will look considerably different from the TOS ship, though it will have the same basic components - and a good many minor bits of historical continuity are up for grabs. Does any of that really surprise or bother anyone? TMP and TNG did the same, after all.

 

[Holytomato]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

"Of course it didn't. It is true, though, that the audience started losing interest in Trek with the premiere of DS9.:

Cuz people wanted TNG Lite tm. And they got it- TNG, TNG movies, Voyager, and Enterprise.

Yay tm!. TNG Lite was so great tm! Star Trek XI should be set after Nemesis cuz Nemesis did so well tm! Star Trek XI should be set after Enterprise ie The Romulan Wars cuz Enterprise did so well tm! What is this TOS cr&p!?

:sarcasm off:

Long Live TOS
1964-

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Holytomato said:
"Of course it didn't. It is true, though, that the audience started losing interest in Trek with the premiere of DS9.:

Cuz people wanted TNG Lite...

Nope, just because they got bored with something that never changed.

Trekkies can argue the differences between TNG/DS9/"Voyager" until they're blue in the face - but then, not only can fleas tell the difference between girl fleas and boy fleas, it's important to them. To everyone else, it's all the same...and in the case of modern Trek, similarly over-familiar.

 

[Plum]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

^^^
That's what I've been saying for ages! And I say it's why ENT failed. I've no idea why they let Voyager go on so long, let alone DS9. Yea, sure, they had loads of terrific eps, but there's a lo of dross to get through. Far too much.

I guess Trek was always a reliable cable filler show. As TNG practically created that market I suppose they just kept making B&B Treks because they felt there was always a market. ENT proved that market went away?

 

[AC84]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

I hope they don't "Star Wars" the Enterprise. Matt Jefferies made the Enterprise sleek for two reasons. The small budget and to make the ship realistic (the guy didn't even want the girl to have windows like the new Battlestar Galactica!). Lets be honest. All the Star Wars ships look like they were pulled inside-out with important vital systems out in the open on the hull, begging to be destroyed. Shields be damned...they always are.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

So, the new movie won't follow the visual design of TOS - the new Enterprise will look considerably different from the TOS ship, though it will have the same basic components

Actually, according to articles now up at Trekmovie.com, the EXTERIOR of the ship will be virtually IDENTICAL to the classic one, if maybe a bit more detailed.

The INTERIOR sets, however...that's another story...they've even trotted out the "this ain't your fathers' Trek" line...

 

[AC84]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:

The INTERIOR sets, however...that's another story...they've even trotted out the "this ain't your fathers' Trek" line...

But my dad hates Star Trek, I'm the one who likes it and I'm only 23. Now I know how Spencer Tracy felt in his last movie......change is scary.....someone hold me.

Seriously though, if they change the iconic throne-like command chair to one of those modern office chairs that we saw in recent Star Trek but can buy at Staples with the gaming chair arm rests, I going to lay in the bath tub in the fetal position, holding my TOS DVDs....with the shower running. All a pretext to ruin my old DVDs and buy the HD DVDs? You bet.