You're right. It was in Star Trek 5. Corrected.
The New Enterprise Reveald
- Thread starter Jefferies
- Start date
You're right. It was in Star Trek 5. Corrected.
It was just so painfully done that it SEEMED to stretch into ST6.
My mom took me to see ST 6 when it first came out. She is a big TOS fan. She didn't even like Enterprise.. .SHOCKING.
I havn't asked her what she thinks about the new ST movie, but if she is like me she probably has lost any ability to care about the francies past the entertainment value.
In the end its a TV show, following it like a religion is bound to failure.
But it is soo much fun to.
I havn't asked her what she thinks about the new ST movie, but if she is like me she probably has lost any ability to care about the francies past the entertainment value.
In the end its a TV show, following it like a religion is bound to failure.
But it is soo much fun to.
Your mother liked ST6 yet not ENT?
I don't find that at all shocking. While I think ST6 was rather flawed I still found it vastly more entertaining and smarter than the entire ENT series.
I've always thought that the birth scene in ST5 was probably not the way it really happened, but more likely a stylized reflection of what Spock deep down inside believed happened. Vulcans may be smart but that much memory seems a bit suspect. Perhaps that scene is another thing that Roddenberry found apocryphal due to his previous contention regarding Spock's birth?
No one knows. It made it into live action on screen, though, which gives it more authority as part of continuity than GR's opinion.
Perhaps he mind-melded with his mother at some point?
Well, consider for a moment that at around the same time ST V came out, the TNG episode "Sarek" aired, and in Picard's opening log entry, where Perrin is described as human, "like his first wife", the whole Vulcan princess plot point is apparently invalidated.
So, we do have a bit more to go by than just GR's irate opinion.
Again, just chalk it up to a drunken ghost story and it all falls into place.
The same Picard who did not correct Wesley's assertion that the Klingons had become a member of the Federation, and in fact agreed with him, only a season or so earlier.
The same Picard who botched the entire Nexus chance to undo a lot of damage to nip back in time with another old man a few minutes to have a fish fight.
The same Picard who probably has little or no idea or interest in Sarek's personal life/past and may simply not have had all the facts about his wives.
I don't hold Picard's word in much regard to be honest. And the scene of Spock's birth was shown onscreen, complete with Vulcan Princess.
"The French cannot be trusted."
Plus this film is changing everything anyway, so the Trek 5 scene stays as the "true" form of his birth.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Your sig says:
Lets get back to space adventure, strange new worlds and the final frontier... Contemporary Trek has failed.
But you don't want to go back to that era, you just want to go back to that design-aesthetic.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
On what do you base that doubt?
On everything I've seen so far.
Also based on past experience with this website I've come to the conclusion that you exist here primarily to provoke. It isn't enough that someone doesn't agree with your approval of whatever TPTB throw out, but that you also seek to imply that because one dissents (and even with offering reasons) that their viewpoint must somehow automatically be flawed and/or has no merit. I've seen you do this repeatedly not only with me but with many others.
If someone doesn't like what you like then fine, let it be. You don't have to take it as an open invitation to impugn their character or intellect by belittling their viewpoint.
And if someone thinks my signature is provocative then what can be made of your chosen avatar?
ST-One
Vice Admiral
We, so far, have only seen a few fast-cut frames in the trailer, which can't tell you very much about the way the story of this movie is told or the acting.
Not even the statements of the creative team (Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman, and the actors) can tell you much about the storytelling.
It would be ... a shame to dismiss this movie just because the visuals don't meet you approval.
If it sucks, it sucks. But a different design wouldn't change that.
QFT.
I chalk all Trek continuity that's in any way a nuisance up to a drunken ghost story, and it all falls into place.
The TOS version of the Enterprise and the building-it-in-space myth is disposed of forthwith. Works for that viewscreen being on the ship centerline, too.
Last edited:
Condescend much?
I've liked other shows and movies that looked nothing like TOS, but they had similar sensibilities in how they told their stories. That is what I'd really like to see again.
I don't get that impression from all we've seen and heard so far regarding Abrahm's project.
So, you're judging the quality of a script and story-telling style that hasn't been revealed to us in full?
How is that smart?
Secondly, I think you're forgetting that TOS dropped its share of turds, as well.
I think you're glossing the bad and elevating the mediocre, lumping the whole TOS in a group with the best eps, and declaring it to be a cut above anything done before or since.
I agree in one sense, that the best eps are a cut above.
But here's where we differ:
The mediocre ones are just okay. (Let's get in on a Piece of the Action)
The stinkers are embarassing to watch now with someone who is not a fan. (Kirok anyone? Or let's check in on those Yangs, or see what the space hippies are up to before we sit in on the operation to retrieve Spock's brain).
Similar threads
