The grasp of Phoenix

[ChristopherPike]

After Nemesis, I was thinking (and kind of hoping) straight to video projects. Certainly not a serious attempt at reconnecting with audiences like we're seeing with this.

That was my wish. Testing the water with something like that for the 40th Anniversary in '06, instead of CBS signalling the final death of TV Trek by auctioning off all the props and wardrobe in the way they did.

No doubt, Star Trek 2009 will a massive success. If not, then this option will still be there... but with a low rent recast of the Abramsverse, instead of giving TNG or ENT a decent reunion.

 

[uniderth]

Bullshit. Successful Star Trek is somehow not Star Trek? No wonder the franchise is in the gutter. You know, there are 40+ years of previous material for you to enjoy and wrap yourself in. Like a nice, warm, pseudo-niche-like blanket.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "Star Trek" that does match up with Star Trek is not Start Trek. It has nothing to do with the success of a movie or TV show.

And I'm perfectly willing to sit in my own little Trek world. So long as none of this alternative Star Trek intrudes into that world. This means nothing about it on StarTrek.com, on any DVD extras, or in any books such as Star Trek Encyclopedia. As long as there is seperate materials so I can choose my Star Trek and not have it violated by this other crap.

 

[datas_cat_spot]

Wow.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...And I'm perfectly willing to sit in my own little Trek world. So long as none of this alternative Star Trek intrudes into that world. This means nothing about it on StarTrek.com, on any DVD extras, or in any books such as Star Trek Encyclopedia. As long as there is seperate materials so I can choose my Star Trek and not have it violated by this other crap.

But what if it is simply different, but not crap -- i.e., it's good? Will you still disavow it? Is it simply "crap" in your eyes since it doesn't seem (at the present time) to match up exactly with established Trek history?

I personally think this will match up much more than we think it will with TOS -- but that's besides the point of my post...

...Even if it doesn't respect canon absolutely, trek fans have a long history (born of necessity) of taking seemingly inconsistent events and make them fit the established history. I don't see why this Trek will necessarily be any different.

I'm not saying it will definitely be a good film or, specifically, a good Trek film -- I won't know that until May. But just because the events in this film don't seem to match the "fanon" that has been created from on-screen clues (and even if it doesn't match some "canon") doesn't automatically make it any less "Star Trek".

 

[RobertScorpio]

...And I'm perfectly willing to sit in my own little Trek world. So long as none of this alternative Star Trek intrudes into that world. This means nothing about it on StarTrek.com, on any DVD extras, or in any books such as Star Trek Encyclopedia. As long as there is seperate materials so I can choose my Star Trek and not have it violated by this other crap.

But what if it is simply different, but not crap -- i.e., it's good? Will you still disavow it? Is it simply "crap" in your eyes since it doesn't seem (at the present time) to match up exactly with established Trek history?

I personally think this will match up much more than we think it will with TOS -- but that's besides the point of my post...

...Even if it doesn't respect canon absolutely, trek fans have a long history (born of necessity) of taking seemingly inconsistent events and make them fit the established history. I don't see why this Trek will necessarily be any different.

I'm not saying it will definitely be a good film or, specifically, a good Trek film -- I won't know that until May. But just because the events in this film don't seem to match the "fanon" that has been created from on-screen clues (and even if it doesn't match some "canon") doesn't automatically make it any less "Star Trek".

You nailed it Kirk....These star trek fans have been living with a flawed continuity every since Khan said he knew Chekov. Ever since that movie, which is the best movie IMO, its been a non-stop 'got yah' lovefest for these continuity folks....They will nit-pick the pips on collars or some random piece of dialog about a ship not even in a given episode. It is part of the reason TREK fans have that Dork lable.

Get a life never had more meaning than it does now...

Rob

 

[LutherSloan]

I never would have guessed that we would get a big-budget ST film, ever.

 

[Messianni]

Bullshit. Successful Star Trek is somehow not Star Trek? No wonder the franchise is in the gutter. You know, there are 40+ years of previous material for you to enjoy and wrap yourself in. Like a nice, warm, pseudo-niche-like blanket.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "Star Trek" that does match up with Star Trek is not Start Trek. It has nothing to do with the success of a movie or TV show.

And I'm perfectly willing to sit in my own little Trek world. So long as none of this alternative Star Trek intrudes into that world. This means nothing about it on StarTrek.com, on any DVD extras, or in any books such as Star Trek Encyclopedia. As long as there is seperate materials so I can choose my Star Trek and not have it violated by this other crap.

Wow... just, wow.

Well, you've got a few months. Prepare yourself for a load of disappointment because guess what... it's Star Trek, through and through, whether you like it or not. Hell, it's actually up on StarTrek.com right now and has been since the very beginning!

...And I'm perfectly willing to sit in my own little Trek world. So long as none of this alternative Star Trek intrudes into that world. This means nothing about it on StarTrek.com, on any DVD extras, or in any books such as Star Trek Encyclopedia. As long as there is seperate materials so I can choose my Star Trek and not have it violated by this other crap.

But what if it is simply different, but not crap -- i.e., it's good? Will you still disavow it? Is it simply "crap" in your eyes since it doesn't seem (at the present time) to match up exactly with established Trek history?

I personally think this will match up much more than we think it will with TOS -- but that's besides the point of my post...

...Even if it doesn't respect canon absolutely, trek fans have a long history (born of necessity) of taking seemingly inconsistent events and make them fit the established history. I don't see why this Trek will necessarily be any different.

I'm not saying it will definitely be a good film or, specifically, a good Trek film -- I won't know that until May. But just because the events in this film don't seem to match the "fanon" that has been created from on-screen clues (and even if it doesn't match some "canon") doesn't automatically make it any less "Star Trek".

You nailed it Kirk....These star trek fans have been living with a flawed continuity every since Khan said he knew Chekov. Ever since that movie, which is the best movie IMO, its been a non-stop 'got yah' lovefest for these continuity folks....They will nit-pick the pips on collars or some random piece of dialog about a ship not even in a given episode. It is part of the reason TREK fans have that Dork lable.

Get a life never had more meaning than it does now...

Rob

Amen to that.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^ Just to clarify --

I never said that about the Dork label and "get a life"...I think you messed up a bit on your quoting.


EDIT TO ADD:
Thanks for the fix -- I knew it was just a "quote tag" isssue. No worries.

 

[M'Sharak]

^
^^ Just to clarify --

I never said that about the Dork label and "get a life"...I think you messed up a bit on your quoting.

I think it was in editing the post down that the tags got bargled.

The quote attribution has now been corrected.

 

[Messianni]

^ Thank you for that, error during editing on my part.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Did any of you really think that, as you walked out of Nemesis, that this day would come? And I don't mean another Trek movie, I mean a big time TREK movie with all the trimmings?

Sure, it is clear that many TREK fans will not like this movie because of its obvious liberties with the continuity (to me this is a plus not a negative)...but I have to tell you, after the wreck of a movie that Nemesis was, I thought TREK, where movies were concerned, were dead..in fact, I thought we'd be lucky to get a cartoon series after that movie...

TREK XI is with out a doubt the most important movie since TMP. So much is riding on this movie, and I hope, like the Phoenix, it rises to an ever more brighter future...

Rob
Scorpio

Well, I remember the run up to "Nemesis" (which was, still, a far more enjoyable movie than, say, "Insurrection"). I remember the hype. I remember the high hopes. I remember the idea that this "new guy" behind the movie would breath fresh air into the franchise. And how this new movie, Nemesis, was going to appeal to both old-time fans and to casual moviegoers alike.

The problem was that, instead of giving us a good movie... one that the audiences (both fans and non-fans alike) would enjoy, we got a movie which bored non-fans and offended fans.

 

[Messianni]

Did any of you really think that, as you walked out of Nemesis, that this day would come? And I don't mean another Trek movie, I mean a big time TREK movie with all the trimmings?

Sure, it is clear that many TREK fans will not like this movie because of its obvious liberties with the continuity (to me this is a plus not a negative)...but I have to tell you, after the wreck of a movie that Nemesis was, I thought TREK, where movies were concerned, were dead..in fact, I thought we'd be lucky to get a cartoon series after that movie...

TREK XI is with out a doubt the most important movie since TMP. So much is riding on this movie, and I hope, like the Phoenix, it rises to an ever more brighter future...

Rob
Scorpio

Well, I remember the run up to "Nemesis" (which was, still, a far more enjoyable movie than, say, "Insurrection"). I remember the hype. I remember the high hopes. I remember the idea that this "new guy" behind the movie would breath fresh air into the franchise. And how this new movie, Nemesis, was going to appeal to both old-time fans and to casual moviegoers alike.

The problem was that, instead of giving us a good movie... one that the audiences (both fans and non-fans alike) would enjoy, we got a movie which bored non-fans and offended fans.

That's a valid point and I remember that as well. However, it was still being produced by the same team that had run the franchise for 18 years and the same few actors with the big egos that ran the course of the plot. Not only that, but Paramount did not have the faith in Nemesis that they do in Star Trek, as can be seen by both the differences in budget (~$60 million vs. ~$130 million) and the massive marketing buzz that the latter has over for former. Release dates are evidence of this as well.

Paramount would not risk putting a film into the crucial May summer blockbuster season, especially in such an economic downturn, if they did not think the film would make them money and as such, be successful.

 

[CDR6]

Well lets face it the original cast(s) are now to old, some have gone to their just rewards, so a new cast is clearly in order.

I would have liked a bit more consertive approach to the design of the Enterprise, instead we got a cross between TNG and Star Trek Phase 2. (Oh well... Retro-retro I guess.)

One last barb... in this day and age 130 megabucks is chump change (lets face it) and Paramont is as Walter Koening said "Just milking the Chocklate Cow one more time."

Maybe I'm too much of an optimist... But I am holding out hope aginst hope that the sum will be greater than the total of its individual parts.

-Chuck

 

[Lashmore]

But I am holding out hope aginst hope that the sum will be greater than the total of its individual parts.

A six penis'd centauri would agree

 

[RealTime]

I've enjoyed all the movies, with varying mileage, but certainly this one happening so soon is a surprise. And a pleasant one at that!

RT.

 

[shapeshifter]

This film is what I call a valentine to the fans!

 

[datas_cat_spot]

This film is what I call a valentine to the fans!

If the movie = diamond ring, then we'll "pretty much have to".

 

[ChristopherPike]

If the movie = diamond ring, then we'll "pretty much have to".

Too bad they used that cremation ashes process to make the rock.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I've enjoyed all the movies, with varying mileage, but certainly this one happening so soon is a surprise. And a pleasant one at that!

RT.

Agreed..I thought, after nemesis, we were looking at a 10 year gap between it and the next movie..I got it half right!!

Rob

 

[Augustus]

I remember thinking, that if there ever was another movie, I thought they would have to change things up BIG TIME. But not in the way that this new movie is doing it.

I remember reading a script treatment of some kind where Trek would be changed in things like: not a focus on one starship or crew. You know? Imagine if we saw the Trek Universe through the eyes of a non-starfleet bridge crew?

I don't remember where I saw that, or who had written it, but I thought that if Trek was going to have a future, it would indeed have to be changed.