It's just the same old comments over and over again!

[JoeZhang]

or as Sherlock Holmes would say There is nothing new under the sun. I had a quick trawl of the old use net news groups - just think in 25 years, people will be getting ready for Star Trek 20: the Nu Generation and they might uncover our old posts on the hypernet...

Time travel? what a crappy idea!

From: m@pyux
Local: Sun 30 Mar 1986 05:55
Subject: Re: Star Trek IV Rumors

Clearly, STIV must not go back in time to alter events. If they did, and were succesfull, you could never believe any of the stories again. Imagine: The new enterprise and the Klingons go into fierce battle. The Enterprise is (gasp!) DESTROYED. BUT WAIT- Here goes Admiral Kirk back in time. No problem - if at first you dont succeed, hit the old restart button by going back in time and try again. No, the writers would be doing themselves a great injustice if they took the easy way out.

Newsgroups: net.startrek
From:
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 16:27:40 EST
Subject: Re: Star Trek IV Rumors

You mean "now" like 1986? Wait a second...*that* doesn't make any sense...

Those are suppose to be Klingons? They don't look like Klingons, what with the crappy helmets?

#R:mako:-14700:ihlpf:6700001:000:1394 ihlpf!ctb
Jun 9 17:46:00 1984

I saw ST3, and went away with a bad taste in my mouth. the klingons were believable?? what was that plastic crap on top of their heads?? did that look real?

This will be a flop!

Newsgroups: ont.sf-lovers
From: nguye@w
Local: Fri 30 Oct 1987 07:46
Subject: Re: Star Trek: the Next Generation

I give this [TNG] series less than one season!

Kirk and Uhrua should get it on!

Newsgroups: net.startrek
From: wilds@nm
Date: Tue, 22-Oct-85 04:24:19 EDT
Subject: Re: The next Star Trek Movie???

It is my feeling that at this point in time ( STIV? ) Jim and Nyota should both recognize that this time is right, the feelings are right, and that they are ready! This is a natural if I have ever seen one. Perhaps Jim should be prompted somehow by Bones that it is time to settle down.

 

[What's his face]

Wow. Just Wow.
Where did you get this? Are they talking over the internet? Did they even have internet back then or were these messages communicated via pigeon?

 

[DeafPoet]

JoeZhang gets today's Gold Star

 

[JoeZhang]

Wow. Just Wow.
Where did you get this? Are they talking over the internet? Did they even have internet back then or were these messages communicated via pigeon?

Yeah it's from the electronic bulltin boards of the time, they are still searchable in any number of ways including google groups (use the advanced search and change the years you want to search) - it's great fun looking at any hobby

The flash is going to die in Crisis on Infinite Earth? yeah right!

Don't be so bloody silly, there will never be a female M in the bond films!

I hear that Arnie has already started filming I is legend - FACT!

 

[Sector 7]

Incredible... it also proves the naysayers aren't new, just spouting the same tired, old drivel.

 

[Newspaper Taxi]

According to those records the buzzword "Reset Button" is at least one year older than I am.

 

[What's his face]

I am one of the few old startrek devotees not looking forward to STIII.
The Enterprise represented for me the centerpiece of the whole of the
series. As goes it, so goes Star Trek.
Remember the opening lines of the series:

"...These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise, it's 5 year mission..."

It doesn't say,

"...These are the voyages of Capt. Kirk and his buddies, one of whom is
a Vulcan..."

I, maybe a bit set in my ways and of the generation of original network series
watchers, felt all of Kirk's emotion during the 'Enterprise walkaround' scene
in STI-TMP. Bit silly I guess, but I liked the way that STI so carefully
added to and upgraded the Enterprise. It was The Enterprise vs. Vijer in
the ending scenes, etc.

It won't be Star Trek without the Enterprise.*sigh*

This is why I didn't shed too many tears for Spock. It was an excellent
story. If they manage to bring Spock back, I will be very disappointed.
As David Gerrold put it, dead is dead. But by killing a character and
bringing them back to life basically means that you are lieing to your
audience somewhere. "Hey, remember when we said Spock was dead? Guess
what! He's not! Fooled you, didn't I! Ha ha ha ha!"

Interesting. More interesting is that there are still buttons that say "Reply to Author".... if I did that do you think I would get an answer?

 

[JoeZhang]

Incredible... it also proves the naysayers aren't new, just spouting the same tired, old drivel.

A lot of the conversation about Star Trek 4 is quite interesting, a common theory of the time seems to be that Kirk and the crew were going back in time to kill Khan and prevent the events of the last two films...

 

[What's his face]

The movie was supposed to be filmed in HDTV, and it showed.

Whoa, Wha???? They had HDTV in the 80s? CONTINUITY ERROR! Whoever wrote real life just raped my childhood!

Seriously, what did HDTV stand for? They didn't actually have that back then did they?

On the premiere of TNG:

Lt. Yaaa [or whatever] needs better writing. There's the bare plot-
thread of a character there, buried under all that bad writing. Make
her better, or else lose her.

Hehe, ask and you shall recieve How much do you wanna bet this guy whined when she was actually killed off?

 

[Penta]

Whoa, Wha???? They had HDTV in the 80s? CONTINUITY ERROR! Whoever wrote real life just raped my childhood!

Seriously, what did HDTV stand for? They didn't actually have that back then did they?

The saga of HDTV is loooooong and convoluted. HDTV was officially demo'd in the 1980s, but it took an eternity and a half to work out the standards. Suffice to say that yes, they did have HDTV of a sort.

 

[What's his face]

Holy shit really? Wow. You learn something new every day.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yep, the "Star Trek Orthodoxy" has been around, and a drag, for decades.

When I saw the title "It's just the same old comments over and over again," however, at first I thought it represented the realization that we're going to rehash the same comments and arguments every day in this forum for the next five months and nineteen days.

 

[USS Mariner]

Let's just not make the mistake that it's been the same people saying this stuff for the past 25 years.

That bit about HDTV is cool though.

 

[datas_cat_spot]

or as Sherlock Holmes would say There is nothing new under the sun. I had a quick trawl of the old use net news groups - just think in 25 years, people will be getting ready for Star Trek 20: the Nu Generation and they might uncover our old posts on the hypernet...

Time travel? what a crappy idea!

From: m@pyux
Local: Sun 30 Mar 1986 05:55
Subject: Re: Star Trek IV Rumors

Clearly, STIV must not go back in time to alter events. If they did, and were succesfull, you could never believe any of the stories again. Imagine: The new enterprise and the Klingons go into fierce battle. The Enterprise is (gasp!) DESTROYED. BUT WAIT- Here goes Admiral Kirk back in time. No problem - if at first you dont succeed, hit the old restart button by going back in time and try again. No, the writers would be doing themselves a great injustice if they took the easy way out.

Newsgroups: net.startrek
From:
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 16:27:40 EST
Subject: Re: Star Trek IV Rumors

You mean "now" like 1986? Wait a second...*that* doesn't make any sense...

Those are suppose to be Klingons? They don't look like Klingons, what with the crappy helmets?


This will be a flop!

Newsgroups: ont.sf-lovers
From: nguye@w
Local: Fri 30 Oct 1987 07:46
Subject: Re: Star Trek: the Next Generation

I give this [TNG] series less than one season!

Kirk and Uhrua should get it on!

Newsgroups: net.startrek
From: wilds@nm
Date: Tue, 22-Oct-85 04:24:19 EDT
Subject: Re: The next Star Trek Movie???

It is my feeling that at this point in time ( STIV? ) Jim and Nyota should both recognize that this time is right, the feelings are right, and that they are ready! This is a natural if I have ever seen one. Perhaps Jim should be prompted somehow by Bones that it is time to settle down.

You win the internet.

At least for today.

 

[cynical dreamer]

JoeZhang: If I had a gold star and a cookie to give you for this thread...

Star Trek: Raping your childhood since 1984.

 

[Space Cowboy]

Some comment about "the more things change" comes to mind. I guess I just can't relate to all the negativity since I'm a couple years younger than the first couple of gems in the OP.

I wonder what an age/opinion poll for the new movie would look like...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Let's just not make the mistake that it's been the same people saying this stuff for the past 25 years.

It's generally been the TOS "purists." They were the main source of fannish complaint about TNG, for example.

The argument has always been between the people who want it to stay the way it has been, and the folks who are either willing or curious or eager for the new. So essentially it's the same folks over and over, yeah.

 

[USS Mariner]

*moans*

Thanks for missing the point Dennis.

 

[cynical dreamer]

It does go to show you how Trek has persevered over the years and how adaptable to change the concept of Star Trek is.

It also goes to show that there can be a Trek for everyone. Far too often I see people run down one iteration of Trek (usually ENT or VOY or NEM) to pump up THEIR favorite version. And I always want to say to them, "you know, it's actually a good thing there are different styles of Trek. It's be boring if they were all exactly alike in tone and style". Why can't they all coexist amongst the fan base.

I present myself as proof that you can be a raving Voyager and Enterprise fan (i really liek the others as well but VOY is my favorite) and still really really look forward to the new movie. And it's a real drag when someone runs Voyager or ENT down in order to make some point about how the new movie is going to be so much "better" than...

No better, just different. And that's a good thing.

 

[darkshadow0001]

It's because none of us have lives