When Will the Penny Drop then...?

[Plumster]

'You've raped my childhood'

'Canon Violations'

'Abram's is an idiot'

Et al.

When will folks realise that making Star Trek films for a few fanatical fans is what would actually kill it? Stories wrapped up in stories wrapped up in detail is of no interest to anyone other than a few thousand pedants. WHAT STUDIO WILL SPEND MILLIONS TO ENTERTAIN A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE THEN? It's why we got the shit we got for years - IT'S ALL YOUR FRIKKING FAULT.

For those who had the TOS and nothing else for years - what did we have before Trek came along? There was no canon - there was no antecedence - there was nothing bitch about. TNG made one decent film and DS9 soap opera would not make decent cinema viewing IMO so don't even go there.

This trailer is all you've got for the immdiate future - if you don't like it I suggest you buy some DVD's and lock yourself into a room somewhere and fanwank yourself to death over Janeaway and her stupid voice. If this makes money - then you might get something that meets with your approval as a spin off.

I, on the other hand, will be at the cinema with my children introducing them to something, fingers crossed, that will inspire them the same way TOS inspired me all those years ago.

If you don't like it - then how on earth can you be a fan? Our children sometimes do things we don't like - it does not mean that we stop loving them.

Pithy responses incoming.

 

[StarTrek1701]

'You've raped my childhood'

'Canon Violations'

'Abram's is an idiot'

Et al.

When will folks realise that making Star Trek films for a few fanatical fans is what would actually kill it? Stories wrapped up in stories wrapped up in detail is of no interest to anyone other than a few thousand pedants. WHAT STUDIO WILL SPEND MILLIONS TO ENTERTAIN A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE THEN? It's why we got the shit we got for years - IT'S ALL YOUR FRIKKING FAULT.

For those who had the TOS and nothing else for years - what did we have before Trek came along? There was no canon - there was no antecedence - there was nothing bitch about. TNG made one decent film and DS9 soap opera would not make decent cinema viewing IMO so don't even go there.

This trailer is all you've got for the immdiate future - if you don't like it I suggest you buy some DVD's and lock yourself into a room somewhere and fanwank yourself to death over Janeaway and her stupid voice. If this makes money - then you might get something that meets with your approval as a spin off.

I, on the other hand, will be at the cinema with my children introducing them to something, fingers crossed, that will inspire them the same way TOS inspired me all those years ago.

If you don't like it - then how on earth can you be a fan? Our children sometimes do things we don't like - it does not mean that we stop loving them.

Pithy responses incoming.

This. QFT.

 

[Baldus885]

'You've raped my childhood'

'Canon Violations'

'Abram's is an idiot'

Et al.

When will folks realise that making Star Trek films for a few fanatical fans is what would actually kill it? Stories wrapped up in stories wrapped up in detail is of no interest to anyone other than a few thousand pedants. WHAT STUDIO WILL SPEND MILLIONS TO ENTERTAIN A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE THEN? It's why we got the shit we got for years - IT'S ALL YOUR FRIKKING FAULT.

For those who had the TOS and nothing else for years - what did we have before Trek came along? There was no canon - there was no antecedence - there was nothing bitch about. TNG made one decent film and DS9 soap opera would not make decent cinema viewing IMO so don't even go there.

This trailer is all you've got for the immdiate future - if you don't like it I suggest you buy some DVD's and lock yourself into a room somewhere and fanwank yourself to death over Janeaway and her stupid voice. If this makes money - then you might get something that meets with your approval as a spin off.

I, on the other hand, will be at the cinema with my children introducing them to something, fingers crossed, that will inspire them the same way TOS inspired me all those years ago.

If you don't like it - then how on earth can you be a fan? Our children sometimes do things we don't like - it does not mean that we stop loving them.

Pithy responses incoming.

Word. Trek has become a boring mess since VOY and INS, if it has to sacrifice this nonsensical notion of "canon" - which is a load of BS anyway - then so be it. Movies aren't made for a small minority, and neither should Trek.

 

[Plumster]

The real campaign should be to 'out' the fuckers who foisted all this canon shite upon us and ran us all down everytime something was slightly out of their imposed kilter - the ones who took something without limits and imposed limits upon it because 'they knew better'.

Two hours of this movie based upon that trailer or two hours of Voyager etc?

Like I said - get the DVD's and lock yourself away from the rest of us - the damage you've done is incalculable.

I'll take the award winning, big budget getting, studio doors opened, Abrams version thanks very much.

The rest of the fanwank scum out there - I suggest you rent your own cinema and watch Insurrection a few times and don't bother us ever again.

Is that contraversial or did it need to be said?

 

[Saul]

IT'S ALL YOUR FRIKKING FAULT.

We didn't make the show. You say we are only a few thousand fans who care about anything Star Trek but yet we somehow were responsible for the failure of the franchise.

We are so powerless to do anything about Canon or anything of the such in Star Trek yet we almost brought the whole franchise down?

Which is it? Are we powerful as that or just a few who can't change anything?


Or wait... do you just want to bitch about a few bitches?

Oh right...carry on then.

I'd rather read posts about people bitching about canon than posts like

BUT TEH FANS!!!!1111!! IS DESTROYING STAR TREK!!!111 WAAAAHHHHH!!

 

[PhoenixIreland]

How does changing the ship and bridge design attract millions more people or keeping those designs turn them away copping out to a small minority?

Even non-ST fans know what the enterprise looks like (or is supposed to)

 

[Plumster]

IT'S ALL YOUR FRIKKING FAULT.

We didn't make the show. You say we are only a few thousand fans who care about anything Star Trek but yet we somehow were responsible for the failure of the franchise.

We are so powerless to do anything about Canon or anything of the such in Star Trek yet we almost brought the whole franchise down?

Which is it? Are we powerful as that or just a few who can't change anything?


Or wait... do you just want to bitch about a few bitches?

Oh right...carry on then.

I'd rather read posts about people bitching about canon than posts like

BUT TEH FANS!!!!1111!! IS DESTROYING STAR TREK!!!111 WAAAAHHHHH!!

Blah - blah - blah - the news Brother is that you are yesterday's news.

A big budget Star Trek film, done by one of Hollywood's hottest talents, is coming through and you are about to blown into the weeds.

You have nothing to say that I care to hear anymore - you had your version of Trek now here comes one for the 21st century.

Sorry.

 

[Saul]

Blah - blah - blah -

That sums up your posts quite well.

 

[Plumster]

How does changing the ship and bridge design attract millions more people or keeping those designs turn them away copping out to a small minority?

Even non-ST fans know what the enterprise looks like (or is supposed to)

That why you, and the likes of you, don't get it - it's the scale of the endeavour that counts and you are imposing your own lack of scale upon JJ's vision.

I so can't wait for you and your type to set up a breakaway board - we won't have to humour you anymore then.

I'm so sorry if I come across as a bit rude - but the light at the end of the tunnel is growing ever brighter and your lack of vision and imagination is growing ever more distant.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

How does changing the ship and bridge design attract millions more people or keeping those designs turn them away copping out to a small minority?

Even non-ST fans know what the enterprise looks like (or is supposed to)

That why you, and the likes of you, don't get it - it's the scale of the endeavour that counts and you are imposing your own lack of scale upon JJ's vision.

I so can't wait for you and your type to set up a breakaway board - we don't have to humour you anymore then.

Way to sweepingly generalize.
As I said on another post I have only been to this forum rarely, three times since I joined, because until the photos were released it was pure rumor, and I don't like what I see so far, is that a crime?

I thought the new bond movie was garbage too, even tho I loved Casino Royale, does that mean I'm part of a fanatical fringe group of nutcase bond haters clinging to the 20th century?

The argument I'm hearing is it can't be like the 60s version, I'm not disputing that, but I thought they'd upgrade, like the did with a mirror darkly, instead of re-doing it totally.

The argument seems to be if it stays the same it attracts less people? but how does redesigning the ship (which even non-st fans easily recognise) and bridge bring in new people? or how would keeping the same ship design harm a movie? this is the part that confuses me.

 

[Devon]

Even non-ST fans know what the enterprise looks like (or is supposed to)

That's quite a broad assumption.

Someone over on TrekMovie.com I guess took a photo of the new Enterprise and showed it to people in their dorm, and another to people in their office, and they all thought it was the Enterprise. I guess the dorm guy said the people there thought it looked pretty good (or maybe it was the office guy.)

 

[Dale]

Plumster you make some valid points... and then take all the "oomph" out of them by being a complete tool.

 

[Plumster]

Plumster you make some valid points... and then take all the "oomph" out of them by being a complete tool.

That's the internet for you I guess.

Will you be my friend though and act as my guide through the pedantic wastelands of this debate?

 

[Devon]

The argument I'm hearing is it can't be like the 60s version, I'm not disputing that, but I thought they'd upgrade, like the did with a mirror darkly, instead of re-doing it totally.

What did they really do with the "Mirror, Darkly" ship? Just added a few aztec panels to the ship? Oh wow. That's movie material right there.

The argument seems to be if it stays the same it attracts less people? but how does redesigning the ship (which even non-st fans easily recognise) and bridge bring in new people? or how would keeping the same ship design harm a movie? this is the part that confuses me.

Maybe when you deal in movie design you'd know. They didn't even keep the same design for "The Motion Picture" or even the same ship obviously. *Hint # 1*

Even Gene the Bird said that the bridge would have to be upgraded to look more sophisticated and better for the big screen.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

Even non-ST fans know what the enterprise looks like (or is supposed to)

That's quite a broad assumption.

Someone over on TrekMovie.com I guess took a photo of the new Enterprise and showed it to people in their dorm, and another to people in their office, and they all thought it was the Enterprise. I guess the dorm guy said the people there thought it looked pretty good (or maybe it was the office guy.)

of course you'd recognise it, but its not the same ship...I'm really wondering what their motivation for changing the design was?

 

[Plumster]

The argument I'm hearing is it can't be like the 60s version, I'm not disputing that, but I thought they'd upgrade, like the did with a mirror darkly, instead of re-doing it totally.

What did they really do with the "Mirror, Darkly" ship? Just added a few aztec panels to the ship? Oh wow. That's movie material right there.

The argument seems to be if it stays the same it attracts less people? but how does redesigning the ship (which even non-st fans easily recognise) and bridge bring in new people? or how would keeping the same ship design harm a movie? this is the part that confuses me.

Maybe when you deal in movie design you'd know. They didn't even keep the same design for "The Motion Picture" or even the same ship obviously. *Hint # 1*

Even Gene the Bird said that the bridge would have to be upgraded to look more sophisticated and better for the big screen.

Dudes - you are guilty of getting caught up in the silly little details that holds back the debate and the franchise for many years - the issue is scale and endeavour.

Scale and endeavour.

Without knowing the in's and out's of the film - we can't really get into the story but scale and endeavour are already obvious ergo debatable - now then;

Voyager or Trek a la Abrams?

 

[PhoenixIreland]

What did they really do with the "Mirror, Darkly" ship? Just added a few aztec panels to the ship? Oh wow. That's movie material right there.

What I meant was make the bridge look more functional in ways they could not afford to do in the 60s, moving screens etc, subtle changes are often the best.

Maybe when you deal in movie design you'd know.

Well I don't, so enlighten me?

They didn't even keep the same design for "The Motion Picture" or even the same ship obviously. *Hint # 1*

I'd like to know why they did that too tbh, maybe they thought the ship would be too old by then and needed an upgrade, or with the D is (supposidly) didn't look good on a cinema screen, but whats the reason for this change?

Even Gene the Bird said that the bridge would have to be upgraded to look more sophisticated and better for the big screen.

but instead it looks like something out of Galaxy Quest

 

[Plumster]

What did they really do with the "Mirror, Darkly" ship? Just added a few aztec panels to the ship? Oh wow. That's movie material right there.

What I meant was make the bridge look more functional in ways they could not afford to do in the 60s, moving screens etc, subtle changes are often the best.

Maybe when you deal in movie design you'd know.

Well I don't, so enlighten me?

They didn't even keep the same design for "The Motion Picture" or even the same ship obviously. *Hint # 1*

I'd like to know why they did that too tbh, maybe they thought the ship would be too old by then and needed an upgrade, or with the D is (supposidly) didn't look good on a cinema screen, but whats the reason for this change?

Even Gene the Bird said that the bridge would have to be upgraded to look more sophisticated and better for the big screen.

but instead it looks like something out of Galaxy Quest

Burn the heretics - burn the heretics - you can hear it from all the usual suspects.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

and guys/girls/whatever else theres no need to be dicks, and insult each other, differences of opinion do not mean one person is living in the past or has an inferior opinion to yours, believe it or not everyones opinion is just as valid as yours, be civil.

Some are clearly more interested in the usual internet board trolling and personal attacks rather than having a discussion.

 

[Plumster]

and guys/girls/whatever else theres not need to be dicks, and insult each other, differences of opinion do not mean one person is living in the past or has an inferior opinion to yours, believe it or not everyones opinion is just as valid as yours, be civil.

Apologies if it comes across as otherwise - no ill meaning intended.

My points are serious and well intentioned.

However................