Primarily TOS fans on the new movie?
- Thread starter jayrath
- Start date
Pulp science-fiction! Now that's something I can get into, and I hope that there is that element of it in this new Trek movie.
^ Sadly, I don't think the new movie will. The modern audience views retro pulp as cheesy and unbelievable. Sure, there may be the odd nod and a wink to the retro times (a woman in the background wearing a miniskirt, perhaps), but I just can't see it happening. Oh well!
I saw an interview with Russel T Davis, the producer of new Doctor Who, about a recent episode set on a space ship. He stated his distaste of 'sleek' and 'clean' starships, saying that they should all be dreary and more industrial in nature. Quite sad, really...
I saw an interview with Russel T Davis, the producer of new Doctor Who, about a recent episode set on a space ship. He stated his distaste of 'sleek' and 'clean' starships, saying that they should all be dreary and more industrial in nature. Quite sad, really...
I feel the same way often, which is why my vacations from the board keep getting longer. As a matter of fact, I felt the same way just now reading that article in which Matt Reeves assures us that TREK XI is "not your grandfather's STAR TREK, that's for sure!"
First of all, Matt, points off for using my grandfather's wisecrack. It was ancient back when Shatner's daughter was using it in Oldsmobile commercials. Second, it's a stupid comment to make in any case, since my grandfather's STAR TREK* is still the best ever produced. Apparently it was good enough, and STILL recognized enough, to serve as the basis for a wholesale reboot of the franchise this year. (It ain't ENT they're using to try to save TREK's big-screen bacon.)
TOS doesn't NEED anything. It's finished, it's been in the can for four decades (Okuda's crayon scribblings still aren't fooling me), it has stood since my grandfather's time on its own merits as a great sci-fi television show. I hope Reeves is right that the next film is a full-blown reboot -- because I'm genuinely interested in seeing how the greatest TREK series will be reinterpreted, because the creative team is fresh for the first time in 20 years and seems to be made up of people who care about TOS, and because I can enjoy a reboot without worrying about how it screws continuity.
-Dan
*(Apropos of nothing and interesting only to me, TOS literally is my grandfather's STAR TREK... his household was within receiving range of only one TV channel (yeah, times were tough then), which happened to be the NBC station, and my father remembers him excitedly telling the family about this great new show he'd just seen called STAR TREK. He was an avid fan, from all accounts. I never knew him -- he died in '67 -- but I'm sure if he could come back today he'd be quite amused to see what his Thursday evening favorite has grown into.
Brundledan said:
I feel the same way often, which is why my vacations from the board keep getting longer. As a matter of fact, I felt the same way just now reading that article in which Matt Reeves assures us that TREK XI is "not your grandfather's STAR TREK, that's for sure!"
First of all, Matt, points off for using my grandfather's wisecrack. It was ancient back when Shatner's daughter was using it in Oldsmobile commercials. Second, it's a stupid comment to make in any case, since my grandfather's STAR TREK* is still the best ever produced. Apparently it was good enough, and STILL recognized enough, to serve as the basis for a wholesale reboot of the franchise this year. (It ain't ENT they're using to try to save TREK's big-screen bacon.)
TOS doesn't NEED anything. It's finished, it's been in the can for four decades (Okuda's crayon scribblings still aren't fooling me), it has stood since my grandfather's time on its own merits as a great sci-fi television show. I hope Reeves is right that the next film is a full-blown reboot -- because I'm genuinely interested in seeing how the greatest TREK series will be reinterpreted, because the creative team is fresh for the first time in 20 years and seems to be made up of people who care about TOS, and because I can enjoy a reboot without worrying about how it screws continuity.
-Dan
*(Apropos of nothing and interesting only to me, TOS literally is my grandfather's STAR TREK... his household was within receiving range of only one TV channel (yeah, times were tough then), which happened to be the NBC station, and my father remembers him excitedly telling the family about this great new show he'd just seen called STAR TREK. He was an avid fan, from all accounts. I never knew him -- he died in '67 -- but I'm sure if he could come back today he'd be quite amused to see what his Thursday evening favorite has grown into.
*Ctrl-C*
*opens notepad*
*Ctrl-v*
"Actually, I feel the other way - anyone with brains should be perfectly satisfied with the unadulterated original. Those who think it needs a fresh approach are the dummies."
So, should I throw away my prose, comix, rpgs, and dvds of TOS-R, TAS, and Vanguard?
So, should I throw away my prose, comix, rpgs, and dvds of TOS-R, TAS, and Vanguard?
You may keep TAS.
I'm definitely going to watch the film but it saddens me a little that there is going to be a new Kirk and a new Spock. Shatner and Nimoy are hammy actors but watching them act is pretty awesome (To me anyway) - they brought what was often a dull script to life very well and as Nimoy said "I am Spock". It's so weird to think of anyone else being able to step into their shoes!
I will try to go with an open mind though! And at least we will see a bit of Nimoy! 
I will try to go with an open mind though! And at least we will see a bit of Nimoy!
Was it weird when Spock was played by five actors in ST III?
Or when Kirk was played by Sandra Smith?
-Dan
Brundledan said:
Or when Kirk was played by Sandra Smith?
-Dan
Actually yes. Shatner is considered to be one of the most imitatable actors on earth, and yet, she didn't.
In a similar cynical vein, this could be entirely consistent with his actions in Generations and still not be a good sign.
As far as appearing in the film was concerned, he turned it down because it was essentially a cameo - like Chekov and Scotty ultimately do in the movie, he and McCoy show up for the Ent-B prologue and then drop out of the narrative entirely.
Rumour has it that his role in Abrams' film is definitely not a cameo.
And what was his trouble with the Generations script as a director? Basically, creative control. He was not going to develop the story, he was just going to be given the Moore/Braga script and told to shoot it as-is.
So, he's back because the role is big this time. This may still be a good movie - Alec Guinness, you know, did Star Wars strictly for the paycheck - but it's not a good sign. (Nor a bad sign).
And what do I think about this film? Hell, I'll let you know if and when I see it.
I just read that there will be three Spocks on the film. Will that change anyone's mind?
The two skinny ones will balance out the fat one. - M. Python.
Which is the fat one??
Similar threads
- Poll
