• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

JJ Abrams should thow us a bone!

TREK XI isn't a complete continuity reboot. If anything it'll be an aesthetic reboot what with the Pike-era Enterprise looking somewhat different than the classic TOS ship we're familiar with. ENTERPRISE still happened in the TREK universe. You don't jettison ten other movies, an animated series and 704 live-action TV episodes just because J.J. Abrams took over from the Beebs and Paramount wants to "sex up" the movie franchise a bit.
 
Yeah, because if the Enterprise doesn't look EXACTLY the same as it did in 1966 then it MUST be a complete reboot, despite what the writers, producer and director says. God knows they have a lot to gain by lying about it...
 
That's right. It is a complete reboot.
You can't tell me the cheap 60's era Enterprise and the shiny new 2008 Enterprise are supposed to be the same ship?
 
MattJC said:
That's right. It is a complete reboot.
You can't tell me the cheap 60's era Enterprise and the shiny new 2008 Enterprise are supposed to be the same ship?

Why not? If you can accept that Kirty Alley and Robin Curtis are the same person (Saavik)... or that James Cromwell and Glenn Corbett are the same person (Zefram Cochrane)... or that Christopher James Miller and David Tristan Birkin are the same person (Rene Picard), then it should be no trouble to believe that the Abrams Enterprise is the same as the TOS Enterprise. Just think of it as recasting the part and move on.
 
I don't think so.
"Relics", "Trials and Tribble-ations", and " In a Mirror, Darkly" make it quite clear it's supposed look the way in the 60's.
This movie is a reboot.
 
Yeah and The Wrath of Khan made it quite clear Saavik looked like Kirsty Alley. What's the difference?

And even if it is a reboot, isn't it more important that its a quality film that adheres to the feel and themes of Star Trek? And to know that we'll have to wait and see it.
 
If you want to talk about the aesthetics of the new movie, please take it to the Trek XI forum. Let's keep this one on track, yes?
 
There is no reason they cannot have Jolene appear as T'Pol. She would be about middle aged and could be anything from a teacher to an ambassador to still an active officer.
 
EliyahuQeoni said:
Yeah and The Wrath of Khan made it quite clear Saavik looked like Kirsty Alley. What's the difference?

And even if it is a reboot, isn't it more important that its a quality film that adheres to the feel and themes of Star Trek? And to know that we'll have to wait and see it.

Not buying it.
 
I do like the idea of giving nods to the other shows, albeit in ways only their fans would get.

Jolene Blalock could easily appear as an aged, nameless Vulcan. We'd know who it is, even if the average cinema-goer does not. :)
 
Technically there's already been TWO nods to ENTERPRISE in a TREK movie.

In NEMESIS.

The "USS Archer" being a Federation starship assembled with several others to intercept Shinzon's thalaron weapon...and the mention/confirmation that the "where no man has gone before" speech from the franchise was uttered by Zefram Cochrane himself, as seen in the flashback recording of Cochrane dedicating the Warp Five Complex in "Broken Bow."
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top