I'm still not there with Wesley. I'm trying but it's a hard slog. The rest I agree with you... but I'd take Karl Urban in a heartbeat for Dr. McCoy.
Spinoff....
- Thread starter ELCHawk
- Start date
I'm still not there with Wesley. I'm trying but it's a hard slog. The rest I agree with you... but I'd take Karl Urban in a heartbeat for Dr. McCoy.
Wesley doesn't give me as much of that 'college jock, high school bully' vibe that Pine did. Although Pine did grow on me more in Into Darkness and Beyond.
I prefer Wesley. I was unsure of him at first. I thought he looked more like Darrin from Bewitched. But he's slowly growing on me
I prefer Wesley. I was unsure of him at first. I thought he looked more like Darrin from Bewitched. But he's slowly growing on me
You'll have to be more specific.
Yeah. Looks like we are moving. Moving on ti to the tried and true Kirk and crew. They're already eclipsing Pike. Too bad. Same old same old .
How dare they return to the tried and true! Don't they know that Trek is all about the new and exciting while being exactly the same and familiar?
Directions from Star Trek fans on how to make Star Trek: IF YOU REMEMBER, WE DESCRIBED THEM IN CLEARLY ABSTRACT CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS BEFORE.
With all due credit to Fallout New Vegas.
We've been stuck in prequel territory long enough. We dont need to see an inferior TOS.
Back to the early 25th with a new ship and new crew. Time to move on.
We're going to the 32nd century and brand new Star Trek.
As for "same old same old" the 24th and 25th Century era has 29 TV seasons counting Picard and LDS.
The 23rd Century has nowhere near that amount of TV seasons or episodes; so honestly it's a lot newer and fresher than the stuffy old 24th century and one of the oldest captains shown in the Star Fleet.
Using your logic at this point why would you want a prequel set in the 25th Century?
No but I would like to see more in the TOS era. The three seasons of TOS, and two of Discovery and 3 of SNW were not enough.
The 25th century is not forward to me. You hit the 26th and maybe.
We're going to the 32nd century and brand new Star Trek.
As for "same old same old" the 24th and 25th Century era has 29 TV seasons counting Picard and LDS.
The 23rd Century has nowhere near that amount of TV seasons or episodes; so honestly it's a lot newer and fresher than the stuffy old 24th century and one of the oldest captains shown in the Star Fleet.
Using your logic at this point why would you want a prequel set in the 25th Century?
The 32nd century looks just like all kurtzman star trek productions. They made a mistake going so far in the future. There's a limit on how advanced things look it seems. Plus all we've got from the 32nd century is discovery and now a starfleet academy show. Best to put a show in the 25th century and forget about the crappy 32nd century.
Wrong.
It's all starting to blend into Star Trek slop.
Sadly, what you describe is precisely what SNW was supposed to be, along with with Pike and #1.
Thats an excellent way to put it. Im still trying to figure out what year section 31 was in. Im thinking 2325 to 2330 or so. Doesnt look like the period thats for sure. Lol
Why does it matter. From 1966 to 1979 - "When" STAR TREK took plac was debatable and dependent on the episode you were watching. Didn't stop it from becoming immensly popular in syndication over its first 23 years of existence.
Thats your opinion. My opinion is its all muddled now. The set and lighting designers do things the same for all trek eras now. SNW is a bit better but thats because of the enterprise set. But the bridge set is standard with their neon lighting they use for all time periods now. Cheap production doesnt want to pay for regular lighting for the bridges I guess. I also noticed the neon lighting in the 32nd century starfleet academy preview.
Honestly, no, I'm not a fan of the 32nd century. At least what we've seen so far.
It matters is that we can no longer tell just by looking at the sets and design. Same with civilian clothing. Somehow in STD, STP and SNW 20th/21st century clothing is in style. Button shirts with colors, jeans, caps, hiking boots, learher jackets, zippers etc. Yeah the futuristic civilian clothing of TOS, TNG and all Berman shows might have looked strange at times but at least they had a wardrobe person or team designing and making the cloths much of the timx. The Kurtzman era of shows looks like they get their civilian clothing off the Walmart racks. Lol
Huh? In lookingh at the TNG sets it felt like I was watching ST:TMP since they reused everythin g fromm the TOS Feature films. The timeframe was supposeed to be vague - and it wasn't until some fans got anal and wanted to have te 'date' officially set that ST:TMP added "In the 23rd Century."
As for the costuming comparison, give me a break. Until ENT NOTHING had pockets and that was honestly ridiculous. The propuction value and costuming of the Kurtzman era makes TNG look threadbare.
Last edited:
Gene had stipulated no zippers. Now we have 20th century style zippers in the 32nd century. 1200.years we are still using the exact same zippers? Gene made a point not to show any. TNG even showed Ensign row taking off her top coat uniform to give to a Bajorsn child. There was an invisible seam there all along. No zippers or buttons necessary. So cool. But now we are at primitive zippers. Little details like that are glaring to a trek fan.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
