Entertainment Weekly interviews Abrams, Quinto, Nimoy
- Thread starter Admiral Buzzkill
- Start date
They had to tie Shatner's fingers together with dental floss for the "how many fingers do I have up" scene in "Star Trek III." Apparently the Vulcan salute is like wiggling the ears or rolling the tongue - some people just can't do it at all, and some can do it easily. Celia Lovsky, "T'Pau," couldn't do it unassisted either.
Damn, Dennis... you must spend half your day diggin' for this stuff! 
Cary L. Brown said:
Damn, Dennis... you must spend half your day diggin' for this stuff!
You can find most of it at www.trekmovie.com any day.
Responses like this (wholly unsubstantiated and unwarranted) not to mention petulant make me feel sorry for being a Star Trek fan...
If anything JJ has proven over and over agian his respect for what Star Trek is far better then those most recently "in charge"
And I'm afraid GR already "Cashed in", Trek is Paramount/CBS's property. There appears not intent of disrespect in Trek XI or Nimoy it would seem not be a part of it.
They should first and foremost be concerned about making a good movie and not pleasing "the fans", that's how good stories get told.
Sharr
didn't get our decaf today, did we?
I'm having trouble seeing the attempt to restart a dead jalopy as a "lazy" effort. I can understand using that term for the last few "stuck on autopilot" movies in the franchise, but this seems an attempt to try something different. Young minds, we must be tolerant...
This is such a dumb response and really doesn't hold up to logic. So now if someone made a 33rd Century Trek that would somehow not be using someone's idea?
Ah almost all of Trek since Roddenberry made it has been made by "others" then himself - all the TOS movies, alot of TNG. So why's it suddenly such a big deal now? Or are you just looking for reasons to complain?
And I happen to think Abrams respects the source... as do many people now.
Sharr
You, I didn't agree with you before, but since you used the profanity to describe Abrams, I'm CONVINCED! Yep, this movie will suck because Matt can curse!
Seriously, Matt... chill out. Roddenberry did not create every single element of Star Trek, regardless of his frequent claims to that end. In fact, he claimed credit for the work of MANY other people (and pissed off some of the best writers in Hollywood in the process, attempted to wipe the influence of men like Gene Coon and John D.F. Black from the record, etc, etc). And then he ILLEGALLY "cashed in" by creating "Lincoln Enterprises" which, while I have no personal bias against, MOST CERTAINLY qualified as "cashing in."
So, what are you saying? Should no one ever make another Star Trek show, since G.R. is dead and either (1) totally nonexistent, or (2) roasting in Hell (depending on your religious beliefs)?
Or are you saying that it's really Rick Berman who has the right to make "new Trek" but nobody else?
Who, exactly, SHOULD make any "new Star Trek?"
Who wouldn't be guilty of "cashing in?"
Are you saying that you never want to see any more Trek made, or are you saying something else? If it's something else... please give a POSITIVE explanation of what you DO want to see.
Explain how Harve Bennett and Nick Meyers weren't "cashing in on someone else's work?"
Explain how Ira Behr, Mike Pillar, all those guys, weren't "cashing in on someone else's work?"
Explain how you can spew the sort of hate-filled venom I'm seeing come out of your mouth, without the slightest HINT of logic, unless you simply hate all things Star Trek and want to see the entire franchise... the entire GENRE, really... cease to exist.
Otherwise... chill out.
Cary L. Brown said:
You, I didn't agree with you before, but since you used the profanity to describe Abrams, I'm CONVINCED! Yep, this movie will suck because Matt can curse!
Okay, how about if I called JJ Abrams a grossly overrated son of a bitch? That doesn't mean he's lazy...
Similar threads
