Shelve the scene - cut it from the movie, or change it, because it isn't believable . Something the size of the Enterprise, powered the way it is, would have to be constructed in space...
No, you're not the only one who is scared by this trailer!
- Thread starter StoonGuy
- Start date
Shelve the scene - cut it from the movie, or change it, because it isn't believable . Something the size of the Enterprise, powered the way it is, would have to be constructed in space...
Why?
I submit that absolutely any story has rules that determine its believability. Without internal consistency it is impossible to suspend disbelief. I understand the distinction you are trying to draw, but TOS repeatedly depended on things like Nazism in space, the Roman Empire in space, Chicago mobsters in space, an alien race that developed the freaking pledge of allegiance of the United States of America and fought the Commies, not to mention the magical conceit that two species from different planets would not only look completely alike (except for minor things like the shpaes of their ears), but be able to interbreed.
It really wasn't that much more believable than Star Wars in the end.
That said, I understand your point that there was, at least in Season One of TOS, a real sense that this was a possible future for humanity. It was extrapolated from the hopes of the space programs of the USA and USSR, and the first push into space. There were episodes that made it clear the Enterprise had been trekking through essentially empty space for months on end, mapping stars in the complete unknown. It would be very lovely to see that atmosphere again, as it was a lot of what felt compelling about early Trek, and it makes for some damn good stories.
Sadly, this film seems more interested in a universe that feels very full, which has been a big problem of a lot of Modern Trek.
It really wasn't that much more believable than Star Wars in the end.
That said, I understand your point that there was, at least in Season One of TOS, a real sense that this was a possible future for humanity. It was extrapolated from the hopes of the space programs of the USA and USSR, and the first push into space. There were episodes that made it clear the Enterprise had been trekking through essentially empty space for months on end, mapping stars in the complete unknown. It would be very lovely to see that atmosphere again, as it was a lot of what felt compelling about early Trek, and it makes for some damn good stories.
Sadly, this film seems more interested in a universe that feels very full, which has been a big problem of a lot of Modern Trek.
Where it would be much harder to assemble safely, and a much higher cost due to the specialized work force necessary. There's no reason at all why it couldn't be built on the ground - at least in large sections - and then finished in orbit.
number6
Vice Admiral
Because it's not how he sees it, meaning there is no real reason.
Well, let's look at TOS season 1:
WNMHGB: They hit a big pink ribbon, causing ESP and glowy eyes in two expendable characters. Oh yes, and God-like magical powers.
MUDDS WOMEN: Three space hookers, A space pirate dressed as an actual pirate, and placebos that...have magical powers. Or something.
CHARLIE X: Boy...with magical powers...oh dear god.
THE SQUIRE OF GOTHOS: Yeah, this guy would own the Jedi, and he's just a kid.
ARENA: God-like aliens force Kirk to battle a man wearing a lizard suit.
Yeah. No place for fantasy in Trek.
Not that I saw any in the STXI trailer or anything.
I don't get this argument. According to your "established rules of believability" this thing travels faster than the fucking speed of light. And they can't get it into orbit because they assembled it first? Gimme a break.
CaptainHawk1
Commodore
I hate to say this, but maybe we just need to let go of TOS. Are you really expecting a TOS movie using cardboard sets, Rubber monsters, cocker spaniels in costumes and styrofoam rocks and "tech" that looks like it's from the 1965 Radio Shack catalog?
The problem with TOS is that there is absolutely unbelievable.
Ooooooh... blasphemy!
-Shawn
The problem with TOS is that there is absolutely unbelievable.
Ooooooh... blasphemy!
-Shawn
Wrong.
You make some good points, but my problem with your assessment is that you're piecing it all together from seeing the TRAILER. During the 10 days that led up to the release of the trailer before Quantum of Solace, Trekmovie did a retrospective on each of the movie trailers. If you watch any of those, especially the later films, the emphasis is definately on the action and special effects. The story's there in certain small elements, but the point of a trailer is to grab the audience by the lapels and say, "Hey! This movie's gonna rock! Go see it!" I'm suspecting we'll see another, longer trailer closer to the film's release that will have more of the basic story outline in place, but it'll still have the action quotient jacked up high, because THAT, more than anything else, gets the people in the seats.
I think that once we see those scenes in context , they'll make a lot more sense and may even be more visually appealing.
I think that once we see those scenes in context , they'll make a lot more sense and may even be more visually appealing.
I love TOS and will not be letting go of it. I can accept this movie and TOS at the same time, even if they are fundamentally opposed. The test of a great mind is being able to hold two opposing ideas at once.I hate to say this, but maybe we just need to let go of TOS. Are you really expecting a TOS movie using cardboard sets, Rubber monsters, cocker spaniels in costumes and styrofoam rocks and "tech" that looks like it's from the 1965 Radio Shack catalog?
The problem with TOS is that there is absolutely unbelievable.
Ooooooh... blasphemy!
-Shawn
Your post was very long, and more importantly, it was a nonsense rant, which some of us don't have patience to read all the way through.
CaptainHawk1
Commodore
Well, duh! Who do you think this movie is for? Do you really think they spent $170 million on a movie to appeal exclusively to Star Trek geeks?
-Shawn
Especially since he hasn't said anything that hasn't been said and refuted before.
Fail. Did you really need to write a novel in order to get your point across? Instead of sniping at others, try being upset that the point of your post was lost in crappy presentation. Don't be so verbose next time and your point will likely be more well taken and understood. Call me crazy.
CaptainHawk1
Commodore
And I agree with that approach.I love TOS and will not be letting go of it. I can accept this movie and TOS at the same time, even if they are fundamentally opposed. The test of a great mind is being able to hold two opposing ideas at once.I hate to say this, but maybe we just need to let go of TOS. Are you really expecting a TOS movie using cardboard sets, Rubber monsters, cocker spaniels in costumes and styrofoam rocks and "tech" that looks like it's from the 1965 Radio Shack catalog?
The problem with TOS is that there is absolutely unbelievable.
Ooooooh... blasphemy!
-Shawn
What I mean is that TOS fans need to stop clingin to the old interpretation of Trek to the exclusion of all others. This seriously reminds me of the same complaints pre-TNG.
-Shawn
Exactly. Anyone can post 50,000 words of boring, recycled ranting about what Trek 'should be'. Doesn't mean I'm required to read more than the first paragraph of painfully familiar bullshit before skipping to the bottom.
CaptainHawk1
Commodore
I don't know what show you were watching, but TOS was anything but consistent and scientifically realistic. Star Trek doesn't make things up when it wants to tell a story? Do you remember A Piece of the Action, or Abraham Lincoln? For Christ's sake...
You are completely correct. I am not talking about the obviously bad decisions, mistakes and screw-ups along the way. TOS was made under tremendous time pressures, with low budgets, and all kinds of other constraints, just like all Star Trek often is, but that is one of the reasons for making a movie from a TV premise. Hopefully one has the time, money and resources to do things right, and eliminate stupid mistakes.
The point is, Star Trek TRIES to follow a construct. I am not saying that they always get or got it right. Goodness knows they didn't, and much of Star Trek is horrible, but when it is good, it can be really, really good. That is why bad ST frustrates fans - there is so much potential in the groundwork already laid - it disappoints so much when it misses the mark.
As far as TOS, it is very true that in the creation of the series, believability was a highly over-riding factor in making decisions. Much of this ground work got tossed aside as the pressure of making the show set in, and GR and other talented people left for hopefully greener pastures. Honestly, much of early ST is CRAP, I'm not blind to it.
The thing about stuff from TOS contradicting the concept I am putting forward is that anything from TOS was created awfully early in the creation of the construct. ST has now had 40 years of development, refinement and review. A dumb mistake now is much more glaring than something far more stupid done way back then. Does anyone seriously believe that the makers of TOS actually believed anyone would be discussing series continuity 40 years later? I doubt it.
Your response strikes me as arguing about the kind of details that I as a ST fan regard as unimportant. Focus on the global message, and please take it easy... Christ's sake is far more important than any of this friendly discussion.
And I agree with that approach.I love TOS and will not be letting go of it. I can accept this movie and TOS at the same time, even if they are fundamentally opposed. The test of a great mind is being able to hold two opposing ideas at once.I hate to say this, but maybe we just need to let go of TOS. Are you really expecting a TOS movie using cardboard sets, Rubber monsters, cocker spaniels in costumes and styrofoam rocks and "tech" that looks like it's from the 1965 Radio Shack catalog?
The problem with TOS is that there is absolutely unbelievable.
Ooooooh... blasphemy!
-Shawn
What I mean is that TOS fans need to stop clingin to the old interpretation of Trek to the exclusion of all others. This seriously reminds me of the same complaints pre-TNG.
-Shawn
No, it isn't. You're missing the point. The point is Don't make stupid mistakes! I love creative change! I hate obviously stupid flaws which make ST painful to watch.
