Do You Believe the Official Chronology?
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
That's just too damn complicated to comprehend!
I just came across this. Scroll down near the very bottom - JTD is either James T. Dixon or the best copycat I've seen.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
The 2009 toilet came broken -- that's what caused this shitstorm in the first place.
It looks great. White with lots of chrome. Occasionally there's a problem because it's gets more use than the other ones.
Yep. No doubt on that one.
Yes, he wants it to be as blockbustingly popular as movies. It should appeal to little kids and make them and to buy action figures.
In that interview, he was remembering back to when he was a boy, taken to the gala premiere of ST:TMP at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum in December 1979. When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
"A history of the future."
As a rabid Trekkie I go against the grain when it comes to 'teh canon', I'm less interested in consistency and more interested in great stories and characters.
Therefore, I love the chronology for what it is, and it is very well illustrated to boot. Years' being inaccurate is of little concern to me; it would be were I a writer using it as a resource only to find math errors in years/stardates. My only complaint with it overall is that it was published too early - only the first 1 or 2 seasons of Voyager are included IIRC, maybe the first 4 of DS9?
As a rabid Trekkie I go against the grain when it comes to 'teh canon', I'm less interested in consistency and more interested in great stories and characters.
Therefore, I love the chronology for what it is, and it is very well illustrated to boot. Years' being inaccurate is of little concern to me; it would be were I a writer using it as a resource only to find math errors in years/stardates. My only complaint with it overall is that it was published too early - only the first 1 or 2 seasons of Voyager are included IIRC, maybe the first 4 of DS9?
Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
Hear, hear!
Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
Do you read what you type before hitting 'submit? Because what you posted here is flat ridiculous whether you like Abrams or not. The man has been working quite successfully in Hollywood for a while now on both TV and the movie side of things and owns a highly successful production company.
I also don't see liking The Motion Picture as some type of litmus test for being able to make good TV/movies. Hell, there's a good chunk of the fanbase that don't like it.
You really need to dial back your reactions over J.J. Abrams and Star Trek 2009, you're just embarrassing yourself when you fly off the handle because someone mentions wanting it included in a book about a FICTIONAL universe.
So what? I know exactly what I wrote and don't apologize for any of it. I've never liked one single thing JJ has done so why should I cut him any slack?Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
Do you read what you type before hitting 'submit? Because what you posted here is flat ridiculous whether you like Abrams or not. The man has been working quite successfully in Hollywood for a while now on both TV and the movie side of things and owns a highly successful production company.
I also don't see liking The Motion Picture as some type of litmus test for being able to make good TV/movies. Hell, there's a good chunk of the fanbase that don't like it.
You really need to dial back your reactions over J.J. Abrams and Star Trek 2009, you're just embarrassing yourself when you fly off the handle because someone mentions wanting it included in a book about a FICTIONAL universe.
I already said I don't really care if they include his shit in the chronology because I won't buy it anyway (if there ever is another).
And I'm not embarrassed for stating my opinion about a director du jour and the pap he cranks out. Millions might throw money at him in support of his work, but millions do things every day I would never even consider doing.
This emperor has no clothes and I'm not shy to say it.
You just seem to put a lot of energy into hating someone you say you don't care about...
I saw Tim Burton's Batman (1989) twice in theaters, and fell asleep both times.
I'm not going to join in the all-out JJ-non/bashing, although it does make for an interesting read, however I will say that I don't believe Abrams is the best director on the planet, as I find his vision on film making somewhat limited.
As far as storytelling goes, XI wasn't particularly great, exciting at first as a concept but when analysed I believe it feels more like an intro than a stand alone story. Whether the films are liked or not, TUC and Gen, I believe had the best story concepts, they were interesting, had twists and turns and generally kept interest. I don't believe XI stepped up to that mark, nor showed much depth, which is why I don't have much will to watch it again.
I think from what I've read and understood from peoples opinions from many, many different places, is that XI is so far from what has been known previously that people struggle to find a common ground with both of them, not just in narrative but it technology, special effects and generally accepted science of the show. I understand that it's a re-boot, and everything is open to change, but I believe even a small pull-back of the changes to leave something a little more familiar for current fans may have quelled a lot of the rejection that's being seen.
When it comes to my own opinions of the new films, if the history of something is going to be re-made/changed then it must be an exceptional story that cannot be done any other way, otherwise you might as well have translated it forward and preserved the timeline that was already there. XI, I believe could have easily been translated (with the understanding that characters motivations, etc would change.), and it would have made a better story. Always move forward, I believe.
Anyway, since it's already been done and the question is seems to be more about meshing the two universes, I feel more at ease knowing that it is very separate, where that point diverges is the only thing that causes me grief as I don't believe it's laid out very well in the film.
As for the official chronology of it all, I actually find all the contradictions and little errors quite an interesting read, and I don't think it would be half as interesting if it was perfect. There's so much information out there that is as a result of these sorts of things, that I'm really not sure what I'd be doing if I didn't have it all to rummage through.
As far as storytelling goes, XI wasn't particularly great, exciting at first as a concept but when analysed I believe it feels more like an intro than a stand alone story. Whether the films are liked or not, TUC and Gen, I believe had the best story concepts, they were interesting, had twists and turns and generally kept interest. I don't believe XI stepped up to that mark, nor showed much depth, which is why I don't have much will to watch it again.
I think from what I've read and understood from peoples opinions from many, many different places, is that XI is so far from what has been known previously that people struggle to find a common ground with both of them, not just in narrative but it technology, special effects and generally accepted science of the show. I understand that it's a re-boot, and everything is open to change, but I believe even a small pull-back of the changes to leave something a little more familiar for current fans may have quelled a lot of the rejection that's being seen.
When it comes to my own opinions of the new films, if the history of something is going to be re-made/changed then it must be an exceptional story that cannot be done any other way, otherwise you might as well have translated it forward and preserved the timeline that was already there. XI, I believe could have easily been translated (with the understanding that characters motivations, etc would change.), and it would have made a better story. Always move forward, I believe.
Anyway, since it's already been done and the question is seems to be more about meshing the two universes, I feel more at ease knowing that it is very separate, where that point diverges is the only thing that causes me grief as I don't believe it's laid out very well in the film.
As for the official chronology of it all, I actually find all the contradictions and little errors quite an interesting read, and I don't think it would be half as interesting if it was perfect. There's so much information out there that is as a result of these sorts of things, that I'm really not sure what I'd be doing if I didn't have it all to rummage through.
Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
He WAS a boy, and LOTS of adults fell asleep to it.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Somebody pissing all over something he cares about, that's worth some ire.
On THIS, I agree with him rather strongly (and having said that, keep in mind that he and I disagree about a whole lot shit, as in, there's no love lost between us. or am I confusing this poster with INDYSOLO? I know one of them is no fan of mine. It's been a long time since I was a regular here. )
Regardless, Bond and TREK have both died for me this century, so I DO get where he's at, in spades.
Actually, all it "proves" is that TMP was a poorly executed, boring mess of a film with no sense of pacing.Too fucking bad for him. Tells me he's just as stupid as I think he is.When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
TOS wasn't targeted just at kids. It was meant as an adult level SF adventure/drama with broad appeal. So all it proves is that JJ is just as juvenile and shallow as the films he makes.
To say nothing of the fact that the idea that JJ liking or disliking any one film - Trek or otherwise - is some kind of "thumbs up/thumbs down" measure that informs of us his maturity level is ludicrous.
Yes, he wants it to be as blockbustingly popular as movies. It should appeal to little kids and make them and to buy action figures.
In that interview, he was remembering back to when he was a boy, taken to the gala premiere of ST:TMP at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum in December 1979. When he fell asleep and got bored by a science fiction movie.
Well hell, J.J. shouldn't feel weird - that happened to a lot of adults who tried to watch ST:TMP.
If it was supposed to be any of those things - "adult," "adventure/drama," "broad appeal" - it failed in every respect.
Similar threads
