Description of the teaser trailer...SPOILERS, Dude
- Thread starter Admiral Buzzkill
- Start date
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
Love how you start out with "everything" and work your way down to "being built on Earth".
And wasn't it the claim that it was built at Area 51 that was denied?
As as with many previous Teaser Trailers (Godzilla's springs instantly to mind) how do you know this scene is even going to be in the actual film?
Love how you start out with "everything" and work your way down to "being built on Earth".
And wasn't it the claim that it was built at Area 51 that was denied?
As as with many previous Teaser Trailers (Godzilla's springs instantly to mind) how do you know this scene is even going to be in the actual film?
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
Yes, unfortunately you aren't at this point.
Area 51 = Where they conceal identity of UFOs and aliens.
Okay, let's think of the logic of them building a MASSIVE ship at a SECRET location right next to a GIANT city where everyone can see in time we already know that Starfleet and aliens exist? Just as Roberto Orci already pointed out with the bogus AICN report.
Isn't Area 51 supposedly on Earth?
Yes, unfortunately you aren't at this point.
Area 51 = Where they conceal identity of UFOs and aliens.
Okay, let's think of the logic of them building a MASSIVE ship at a SECRET location right next to a GIANT city where everyone can see in time we already know that Starfleet and aliens exist? Just as Roberto Orci already pointed out with the bogus AICN report.
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
The diplomatic answer would be to say that the new Star Trek will be related to the old no more (and no less) than the various itertations of Batman are related to each other.
The honest answer? I don't care if the movie grosses half a billion dollars domestically, if it isn't good, I'll dismiss it handily, as I do many of the idiot-bait blockbusters and tv shows that do well. If it is good, of course, I'll be part of the "bravo" chorus. But I'm not gonna get hung up over how well it comports with the original, one way or the other.
The diplomatic answer would be to say that the new Star Trek will be related to the old no more (and no less) than the various itertations of Batman are related to each other.
The honest answer? I don't care if the movie grosses half a billion dollars domestically, if it isn't good, I'll dismiss it handily, as I do many of the idiot-bait blockbusters and tv shows that do well. If it is good, of course, I'll be part of the "bravo" chorus. But I'm not gonna get hung up over how well it comports with the original, one way or the other.
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
Words cannot describe how little I care about something Roddenberry wrote in the writers bible forty years ago.
This ain't his baby no more, and it hasn't been for a long, long time.
I mentioned this in the other thread, but I've never bought that the original E was a thousand-foot-long starship. The sense of scale just was never there. Putting workers on the hull as the ship is being assembled sounds stunning. I'm looking forward to this. :thumbsup:
Words cannot describe how little I care about something Roddenberry wrote in the writers bible forty years ago.
This ain't his baby no more, and it hasn't been for a long, long time.
I mentioned this in the other thread, but I've never bought that the original E was a thousand-foot-long starship. The sense of scale just was never there. Putting workers on the hull as the ship is being assembled sounds stunning. I'm looking forward to this. :thumbsup:
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
The teaser as a metaphor was my first thought. The whole idea that the major symbol of a franchise over 40 years old stands before you disassembled and "under construction" is a neat touch. A way of saying something old is new again.
-- Airplane-shaped warp engines could refer to the long cigar shape of a plane's fuselage.
-- Nothing in on-screen canon says how the Enterprise was built. However, common sense alone would dictate that a ship of such mass, size, and shape could not have been built entirely on land. It'd be about materials, loads, and such.
(Then again in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" we saw the Enterprise sluggish but stable in Earth's very upper atmosphere. In TVH we saw a bird of prey in controlled atmospheric flight and FLOATING in water. The starship Voyager landed on a planet. And the entire saucer section of Enterprise-D made a controlled crash-landing on a planet.
The teaser as a metaphor was my first thought. The whole idea that the major symbol of a franchise over 40 years old stands before you disassembled and "under construction" is a neat touch. A way of saying something old is new again.
-- Airplane-shaped warp engines could refer to the long cigar shape of a plane's fuselage.
-- Nothing in on-screen canon says how the Enterprise was built. However, common sense alone would dictate that a ship of such mass, size, and shape could not have been built entirely on land. It'd be about materials, loads, and such.
(Then again in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" we saw the Enterprise sluggish but stable in Earth's very upper atmosphere. In TVH we saw a bird of prey in controlled atmospheric flight and FLOATING in water. The starship Voyager landed on a planet. And the entire saucer section of Enterprise-D made a controlled crash-landing on a planet.
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
there's no canonical evidence to say the entirety of the 1701 was constructed in space, I really think many people have some false and personal canon in their heads that they just run with as though it is gospel until someone points out they're wrong. Such as the people in this thread who say there's no evidence of starship construction in the canon happening on planets, when their clearly is:
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Utopia_Planitia.jpg
there's no canonical evidence to say the entirety of the 1701 was constructed in space, I really think many people have some false and personal canon in their heads that they just run with as though it is gospel until someone points out they're wrong. Such as the people in this thread who say there's no evidence of starship construction in the canon happening on planets, when their clearly is:
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Utopia_Planitia.jpg
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
He is not, as far as we know. You've presented no evidence or reasoning to indicate that he is. You're wrong, and therefore you're insulting the character of someone you've never met or spoken to on no basis whatever. How do you justify that?
He is not, as far as we know. You've presented no evidence or reasoning to indicate that he is. You're wrong, and therefore you're insulting the character of someone you've never met or spoken to on no basis whatever. How do you justify that?
Re: Description of the teaser trailer...
He said that there was no reason it would have been done at "Area 51."
Did you see any mention of "Area 51" in that description?
Any other "lies" you think you're pointing out?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Um... excuse me, what did Orci "lie" about?
He said that there was no reason it would have been done at "Area 51."
Did you see any mention of "Area 51" in that description?
Any other "lies" you think you're pointing out?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Similar threads
- Poll
