• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Trek XI "changes" : Blasphemy or not?

Newsflash: It's not real!

And things have ALWAYS been messed up with shows contradicting themselves for years...so when it comes down to it, sit back, have some pop corn, and enjoy the show!

And if that's not good enough for you, take note that the film has a major time travel and "changing the timeline" plot, so the past 3000000 years of Trek has probably been "altered"....
 
Loooong time lurker, first time poster.

Blasphemy? Okay, maybe that's overkill, but I do agree it feels like so many changes have been made that I wish they would just call a spade a spade, and call this the reboot that it's really starting to look like.

I would have been fine with a total reboot, and I'd be even more fine with a recasting that still fit into the known continuity. I'm not fine with saying it's going to be one thing, then making it something else.

I've been cautiously optimistic about this project from the very start, and I'm going to do my best to remain that way till next May, but I'm not going to pull any punches and say I'm in total agreement with everything we've seen.
 
wtf…I was looking forward to this trek movie more than any other, but now that the details are being released, I find this ‘reboot’ of Trek to be full of holes….The Enterprise looks retarded, and what is this crap about ‘Adiral Archer’s Beagle’? He died in 2245 the day after the launch of 1701 under April, and u are telling me that somehow Porthos survived into the 2250’s? (Trek explanation or not, thats just way to much for me) Waaay too many inconsistancies already in just the few scenes that have been described. My excitment level went from warp 9.9 down to one quarter impulse. Thumbs down for Abrams for already fracking up the timeline with lots of nonsence. No Gary Mitchell, no Finney, no Ruth, and whats this about Uhura having a Budweiser and a Cardassian drink? Ask any Trekkie what they think of a Cardassian drink in a human bar in the 2250’s? No one knew who the damn Cardy’s were until the first half of the 24th century. This movie is basically ignoring all that Trek has written for the time period Abrams is tackling. I undersatnd this is a reboot, and I still hope it does well, but we keep hearing repeatadly that this movie will be for the fans as well, and us fans are picky about our canonical Trek material, and this film seems to ignore all of what has passed in the Trek timeline. I do love how they somehow got an Archer reference, but with his 100 year old Beagle? Come on, who was sniffing glue when they slapped this monstrosity together?
Live Long and fill Abrams pocket full of Gold Pressed Latinum.
 
I do love how they somehow got an Archer reference, but with his 100 year old Beagle? Come on, who was sniffing glue when they slapped this monstrosity together?
Who says its the same dog? Very probable Archer would get himself a new beagle every once in awhile.

Star Trek fans are so literal minded. Take it for what it is and move on, there are bigger things to worked up over then Archer and his aged pup.

Sharr
 
wtf…I was looking forward to this trek movie more than any other, but now that the details are being released, I find this ‘reboot’ of Trek to be full of holes….The Enterprise looks retarded, and what is this crap about ‘Adiral Archer’s Beagle’? He died in 2245 the day after the launch of 1701 under April, and u are telling me that somehow Porthos survived into the 2250’s? (Trek explanation or not, thats just way to much for me) Waaay too many inconsistancies already in just the few scenes that have been described. My excitment level went from warp 9.9 down to one quarter impulse. Thumbs down for Abrams for already fracking up the timeline with lots of nonsence. No Gary Mitchell, no Finney, no Ruth, and whats this about Uhura having a Budweiser and a Cardassian drink? Ask any Trekkie what they think of a Cardassian drink in a human bar in the 2250’s? No one knew who the damn Cardy’s were until the first half of the 24th century. This movie is basically ignoring all that Trek has written for the time period Abrams is tackling. I undersatnd this is a reboot, and I still hope it does well, but we keep hearing repeatadly that this movie will be for the fans as well, and us fans are picky about our canonical Trek material, and this film seems to ignore all of what has passed in the Trek timeline. I do love how they somehow got an Archer reference, but with his 100 year old Beagle? Come on, who was sniffing glue when they slapped this monstrosity together?
Live Long and fill Abrams pocket full of Gold Pressed Latinum.

Apparently it's not for the picky fans, I'd say the reeeely picky fans.
 
I'm a bit dubious about Kirk's bike being a BMW. Roddenberry refused to let any member of the crew smoke in TOS, and you needed tobacco advertising in the 60's. Roddenberry was above that.

There's supposed to be an apocalyptic war in the mid 21st century - would BMW survive that? How many companies have survived 300 years?
They don't have a money based economy in the 23rd Century - that has been stated quite a few times.
 
2. I am concerned that the reboot is a further nail in the coffin for ENT, which I think was the best series, although I liked Voyager, DS9 and to some extent TNG. If we can't have ENT Season 5, I would at least like to see an ENT movie. I liked ENT because the characters were strong, the actors very good and the story lines (at least by season 4) were very good.

Archer is mentioned in this firm supposedly. Enterprise is ironically enough the only series that is actually safe form the timeline changes.
 
If it's a total reboot, which I doubt it is, I'm fine with that too. I just want something in the tradition of the best Trek movies: Our favourite characters uphold the moral high ground while blowing some shit up and banging some green chicks.

That's an exaggeration but you get my idea :bolian:

Exaggeration? That's pretty spot on for me!
 
Um, I think you mean they don't have a money-based economy in the 24th Century, cheapjack.

That whole idea only comes from TNG, near as I can recall.
 
Blasphemy or not I no longer care, this film looks like it is going to rock my Star Trek world. What more could a Trekker ask?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top