This film will break tech canon and bend fact canon
- Thread starter Trekster
- Start date
number6
Vice Admiral
MattJC said:
Who's hating? I just like to point out inaccuracies in other peoples statements.
Well, to be honest, I DO hate the idea of this movie, but that's besides the point.
That's entirely the point. Judging strictly by every post you have ever made on the subject, it is totally clear that you don't even know what the idea of the movie is. In fact I doubt anyone does, because they're keeping this so tightly under wraps.
It sounds to me like they are remaking the original series.
Kirk and the others are being recast.
The Enterprise will be in the film in some form.
It involves Nimoy in some way.
There was a rumor that the story will involve a time-travel Romulan and the movie will be an "alternate timeline".
We know that the villain's name will be "Nero" which was the name of a Roman emperor and the Romulans themselves being based upon the Romans.
I think I got a pretty good idea of what's going on with this movie, unless something has changed radically recently that I am unaware of.
Kirk and the others are being recast.
The Enterprise will be in the film in some form.
It involves Nimoy in some way.
There was a rumor that the story will involve a time-travel Romulan and the movie will be an "alternate timeline".
We know that the villain's name will be "Nero" which was the name of a Roman emperor and the Romulans themselves being based upon the Romans.
I think I got a pretty good idea of what's going on with this movie, unless something has changed radically recently that I am unaware of.
Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer had nothing to do with TOS either.
Did Shakespeare's plays stop being Shakespeare when the second cast of each play took over?
Did Saavik stop being Saavik when Robin Curtis took over? For every Saavik fan?
Kirk/Spock/McCoy/Pike, in new stories set on Pike's or Kirk's Enterprise, no matter which actors are playing those characters, under competent writers and director, will still be TOS enough for me.
Shatner can't play Young Kirk any more, so why not let someone else have a go?
Nimoy couldn't play Young Spock in ST III, either, so Carl Steven, Vadia Potenza, Stephen Manley and Joe W Davis played him. It was still Spock.
Gene Roddenberry himself said he looked forward to the day when Star Trek proved it was a mythology for modern times by being remade for future generations. Why should TOS be sealed off from more than 80 original stories just because the original actors are too old/dead to play their characters in their prime?
Of course, you could also stop visiting Star Trek XI boards and pretend there won't be a Star Trek XI.
number6
Vice Admiral
No one is "remaking" the series.
I base my opinion and optimism for the film on what I have seen quoted by the creative team writing the film.
Nimoy came out of retirement to be in this film.
The writers are fans of the series and the novels. They clearly have a reverence for the show and its ideals based on what they've said in interviews.
As much as I hate Tom Cruise and what he did with Mission Impossible, this team really nailed the style of writing and the flavour of the original show better than the other two films.
They want to tell a story with elements set in the TOS era. Since most of the original actors are too old or too dead to play their former selves, we just have to accept that recasting is necessary.
They cast Pike and Chekov. Chekov would have been in middle school during Pike's command, so this means that the film will show different periods of time.
That's all we know. Everything else is rumour and speculation. We don't know the nature of the story, just a bunch of suppositions and panty wadding over what it might be about.
I base my opinion and optimism for the film on what I have seen quoted by the creative team writing the film.
Nimoy came out of retirement to be in this film.
The writers are fans of the series and the novels. They clearly have a reverence for the show and its ideals based on what they've said in interviews.
As much as I hate Tom Cruise and what he did with Mission Impossible, this team really nailed the style of writing and the flavour of the original show better than the other two films.
They want to tell a story with elements set in the TOS era. Since most of the original actors are too old or too dead to play their former selves, we just have to accept that recasting is necessary.
They cast Pike and Chekov. Chekov would have been in middle school during Pike's command, so this means that the film will show different periods of time.
That's all we know. Everything else is rumour and speculation. We don't know the nature of the story, just a bunch of suppositions and panty wadding over what it might be about.
^Are Number6 and MattJC one and the same? I prepared a reply for one of you and when I tried to post, the original post had been removed, and my response was rejected - but now the comment is there under the other name. 
I added some lines to my previous post instead.
Edit: Ah, ok Number6 has edited again. My comments are for MattJC then.
I added some lines to my previous post instead.
Edit: Ah, ok Number6 has edited again. My comments are for MattJC then.
number6
Vice Admiral
MattJC said:
Therin of Andor said:
Of course, you could also stop visiting Star Trek XI boards and pretend there won't be a Star Trek XI.
With this remake it won't be Trek XI, it will be Star Trek I version 2. I'm sorry if that doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense because your conclusion is based on a flawed and misinformed premise.
You're telling me this on a bbs called "Star Trek XI".
I don't care if it's called "Star Trek", "Star Trek XI" or "Star Trek I version 2". It will be TOS for a new generation - and for all those fans of the original, like me, who are open enough to accept a continuation (or a filling in of the blanks) of the journey, with a new cast and new writers.
I think Gene Roddenberry would be disappointed that so many fans remain so close-minded about the possibility of more TOS.
"WILLIAM R. SHATNER"
Agreed.
MattJC: I'm sorry, but you really have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps if you didn't keep backpeddling we'd be seeing your point a bit clearer
There were only two choices: return to the origins of "Star Trek" or leave the damned thing alone.
That's not counting low-budget animation or direct-to-DVD, of course. If they're willing to exploit the Franchise for relatively small and easy money they can do just about anything.
Similar threads
