That's how it is with any Noah Hawley production.
Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley developing Star Trek reboot for Paramount
- Thread starter Casas9425
- Start date
...aaannndd...
Woefully incorrect.
Star Trek was not avoiding its history, but acknowledging and celebrating it, which is why the DS9 and ENT TOS-themed episodes were among the most popular of either series. Shocking, I know. Some have a stick up their asses / triggered by TOS (you can guess certain, paper-thin reasons why), so they seem to believe a franchise that constantly sold the idea of a long, in-universe history should ignore and/or dump the very influential reason the concept exists to this day, one--I will add--and remains the face of the franchise in popular culture.
...unless someone working on their Laugh Factory routine will tell us the Kurtzman era is the face of the franchise / ST at its best....
Who is claiming Kurtzman is the best?
Weird. I thought they were popular because they were enjoyable stories and celebrating the franchise's history.
So we should have more TOS shows is what I'm hearing?
Repeating the apologetic isn't refuting my argument. Besides it was a branched timeline from a re-imagined 24th century.What ridiculous twisting and turning? It's simply a branched timeline created by time travel.
I don't see anything resembling an argument, just nonsense and falsehood. Stating what happened in the plot is not an apologetic.
Reimagined in what way?
I saw no evidence of any depiction of the 24th century having any evidence of consistency of all previous treks depicting it. Suddenly the time travel event occurs and not only are events changed but also aesthetics and the depiction of the universe were radically changed.
Nope, the last seen of Speck was Re-unification.
Nimoy's hiring was as far as I'm concerned, a publicity stunt for the film in order to claim a tie-in to the actual canon of Trek. Oh look, they got old spock, must be trek right? Nope!
And the movie alluded to that.
BTW it's "Spock" S-P-O-C-K
That's not how this works. You have to demonstrate inconsistency.
Last edited:
When's Re-unification? Is that like Red Hour or Life Day?
Well, it's a good thing you're not the copyright holder and can't make the calls of what is and what isn't canon, just like the rest of us average-joe fans.
Argument from authority; they can say whatever in order to continue to produce more drivel, but won't make it turn out better.
Last episode from TNG depicting Spock.
And the movie alluded to that.
BTW it's "Spock" S-P-O-C-K
That's not how this works. You have to demonstrate inconsistency.
Haven't updated autocorrect for a while.
On the contrary, if the director wants to truly depict the 24th century as consistent with previous shows/movies, it takes more than casting the same actor from previous show to depict old Spock.
That's not the title.
In no surprise, you missed:
Hm. I feel the "celebrating" part was mentioned, which is associated with acknowledging TOS--something which was a very popular decision to fans of DS9 and ENT. Oh, i'm certain that back when both episodes aired, some of the bitter among us wished the TOS-themed episodes would've been roundly criticized as "out of place"/ "old" / "not a real part of this era of Star Trek" / whatever, but the opposite happened. Most importantly, TOS was--viewed just as it should have been: the accepted, ever popular past of DS9 and the future of ENT. No "but" or asterisks required.
Mildly amusing attempt.
TOS still being the face of the franchise in popular culture in no way means the creation of more TOS series. It is an acknowledgement of what is viewed as its face and essence, a reality shared by many long-running and/or historic entertainment franchises.
I'm sure it was. Not sure what that has to do with my feeling that TMP and TNG feel very different from TOS and that the characters feel unrelated. Yes, it has a shared history to a degree but I don't think it's one to one this is how it happened.
And who gets to declare the "shoulda" of the franchise? I wasn't aware there was a rule to Star Trek?
I never argued otherwise. That strawman army is really taking a beating.
“Nope” is correct, but not for the reason you think.
Given what little we see of the 24th century in the film, the premise that it somehow contradicts established lore is unlikely in the extreme.
The Thermians are active today.
It's the same old argument..., just for the sake of arguing.
There's nothing new being presented, other than certain folks think the new Producer's are just as bad as the old ones.
It's one Hell of a way to destroy one's own enjoyment of one's supposed favorite TV show.
The concept of 'We don't get a say in the matter', seems to have become "I WANT IT MY WAY... WAHHHH!'
Kinda ridiculous.
I've never understood Hate Watching, I've got much better things to do than waste precious time on that kind of nonsense.
Copium can be a soothing comfort, hope you have a steady supply.
So you really accept the the Romulans were wiped out just because the home planet of their interstellar empire is destroyed and they conveniently need Spock to fix it? An empire whose ships are powered by micro black holes and are warp capable that can't evacuate their planet to other worlds in their empire in time before a supernova.
Its such a flimsy excuse to hire Nimoy. It was a gimmick to attempt to somehow both anchor the jjverse into proper trek and the reimagined shitty parody version of trek.
Similar threads
