| Author |
Message |
lythria_2005
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 07:03
Reply
Star Trek 11 = announced.
Star Trek 11 plot hinters = down right scarey.
Why oh why? Guess what...for those of you who don't know, paramount have decided that they are going to revisit the revisited, with the next movie being set a littel after Enterprise and just before Kirk...why?...
You would think a multi-billion dollar company would learn from their mistakes, but no.
I've heard a lot of people say "it could be good", and "give ti a chance". all I can say is...I gave Enterprise a chance and look where that got me...and it...><...
Damn you paramount, Damn you Abbrahms and damn you Archer!
Wyh couldn't you just be a well behaved franchise and go into the future? Star Trek is not Doctor Who for Kirks sake...><...
anyway...rant over...
I'd be interested to know what everyone else thinks about this...
|
lzrman
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 07:08
Reply
i would have had it finish off w/ enterprise and b4 becomes data, and transcend into finishing voyager off.
|
aeon
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 08:09
Reply
I like Enterprise. And I think, I'd also like a movie about that. *shrugs*
But...
There is a poster released, already. So, I don't believe, that they're really filming a movie about someone, somewhere between Enterprise and the TOS era.
|
lythria_2005
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 08:24
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--aeon+Oct. 25 2006,08:09--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (aeon @ Oct. 25 2006,08:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->I like Enterprise. And I think, I'd also like a movie about that. *shrugs*<br><br>But...<br><br>There is a poster released, already. So, I don't believe, that they're really filming a movie about someone, somewhere between Enterprise and the TOS era.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>The poster shows a TOS badge and science blue on one side and captains yellow on the other...<br><br>The thing is that Paramount have basically said, "don't take the poster literally," and the writer has already said, "The movie will be set around 160 years after Enterprise, but well before Kirk's era."<br><br>Make of that what you will...<br><br>and most Star Trek fans want Star Trek to move forward. Revisiting an old era, like TOS, or somewhere in between ENT and TOS would eb a massive mistake on Paramounts part...
|
aeon
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 09:45
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--lythria_2005+Oct. 25 2006,08:24--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (lythria_2005 @ Oct. 25 2006,08:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->The thing is that Paramount have basically said, "don't take the poster literally," and the writer has already said, "The movie will be set around 160 years after Enterprise, but well before Kirk's era."<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>If it's set arond 160 years after Enterprise (which will be the year 2310), then they're probably going to film the events around the Tomed-Incident, which is way after Kirk's era.<br><br>And now I'm confused.
|
skevington
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 14:33
Reply
Blah. I still say they should go with a DS9 movie. 
Dmitri
|
aeon
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Oct 2006 19:54
Reply
And I agree with Lee. Not only because it rhymes, when I say that, but also because he rocketh and DS9 rocketh, too. 
|
anth
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Oct 2006 02:31
Reply
The most important thing for the franchise is that it is a good film, that appeals to all. I mean ALL! Guess what? Us big time fans make up the minority of cinema goers.
Take Dr Who for example. Did they set out to make a new Dr Who for die hard fans? Or did they aim for the average every day person?
The "average" person just wants to sit in a cinema and be entertained have some fun, or have some great escapism on screen.
The Voyage Home is the biggest Trek film in terms of box office. Because it had mass appeal. Where as the majority of Trek fans go with Wrath of Khan myself included.
No way will Paramount please everyone. We've seen evidence of that here already. For instance, I am a huge TOS fan, i like Enterprise a lot to, i do not like DS9! ( boring profit story lines, or all out war, which is not Trek at all imo. )
If TNG, Voyager, or DS9 had been made when Enterprise was made and aired, they all would have been cancelled at season 4. They all got dramtically better at season 4 just as Enterprise did. All were quite weak during seasons 1-3. It's only when you really love the show that you can revisit the early seasons and enjoy them.
My absolute favourite Trek is TNG, but guess what? making movies of it for the most part has been a disaster. Just because Paramount decide to make a movie of a certain Trek era, does mean it will be automatically brilliant, or bad. It is not the era which the film is set which makes it good or bad it is storylines, and bad directing etc.
I am not naive enough to think the only way to ensure a good Trek 11 is to make it my favourite, TNG. If its a great story, then they can set it anywhere and at any time. I don't give a monkeys when its set. I'm just glad its being made, and hope its a good film.
|
matt
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Oct 2006 03:30
Reply
ok i resppect everyone who says star trek is about the future and thats where it should stay, but i dissagree. star trek has become more then a tv show or movie its a world onto itself now. and every world has a beginning. and i am interested in seeing the beginnings of the world ive come to love. and im sure die hard fans feel the same way. if your looking for a good sci fi show then watch a good scifi show. but if you have watched star trek for many years. in its many incarnations. then you should be a fan of the world that is star trek. and if your a fan of that world then you shou;d wana see any and every aspect of it past present and future. does that make sence to anyone
It made me mad when people were dissing enterprise cause of phasers topedos view screens. when it was said in TOS that they omnly had subspace radio. when rodenbarry made star trek he dident think it would exist 40 years after there inception. and thus oviousl;y some changes had to be made. as long as they dident screw up with some key carrectors i was fine with it..
i can hear it now "but matt they made big changes, the klingons had forhead ridges and the volcans were jerks"
and to you people i say this the loosing of the forhead riges was explaned pretty damn good by many coto if u ask me. hell it dident really need explaining cause we all know the only reason klingons had smooth forheads in TOS way make up artistry wasent so good.
and the volcans in enterprise had lost there way with the teaching s of the great surek, which thanks to the Forge story line they refound their way and became the volcans we all know and love.
these things would have been made clear to people who would have stuck with the show. even the Borgs appearence in enterp[rise we adaquitly explaned with a very possable reasoning.
I mean come on people we need to start turning the other cheek and forget the small stuff. cause theres a reason why star trek fans are called ggeeks. cause most of the population, atleast this younger generation does not like star trek or sci fi ingeneral. and if us die hard fans turn its back on the star trek fanchise it surely will die. unless you want that to happen i say everyone whos like star trek from any area should give this movie a chance and put your personal feelings aside about the plot and saport the franchise. it is after all up to us to vbreath life back into this franchise or let it die.
star trek gave many of us hope for a better future. shouldent we do the same for it. so that someday maybe it can give our kids the same hope for a better future?
|
anth
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Oct 2006 15:01
Reply
*Applauds Matt*
Very well said indeed!
As you say, many of the things Enterprise was picked on for were explained in season four. Problem was, a lot of the people who shouted loudest did not stick with it and see those story lines. They carried on shouting in complete ignorance.
You are correct, if people do keep complaining and doing down a new film before they even know anything about it damage will be done. If those moaners were 100% honest they would admit season 4 of Enterprise was damn good, i'd go as far as saying great. Some episodes are right up there among the best Trek.
Problem was, the moaners had done their damage, they had turned people off the show, maybe some of the guys who maybe could have discovered Enterprise were put off. Those that turned off have short memories, most Trek shows need the time Enterprise did to mature and find its feet.
Matt is right. Get behind the franchise, or at very least stop writing critical stuff online before we've even seen so much as a still from the movie.
Star trek is very unpopular right now. It will not take much to kill it forever.
|
demonvamp
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Oct 2006 19:12
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--anth+Oct. 26 2006,15:01--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (anth @ Oct. 26 2006,15:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->Star trek is very unpopular right now. It will not take much to kill it forever.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>I think one of the reasons is it shows an ideal, and the people of the world aren't in a very idealistic frame of mind right now.<br><br>Brutal honesty is what we keep being fed in the news and the successful shows reflect that darker side *BSG, Supernatural, Lost, and even Dr Who*<br><br>Trek as it was is out of place, and their dark just wasn't dark enough because it still felt cute and most of the people have redeming features. There was never any real threat, or shock, you knew folk would survive.<br><br>The last shocking Trek death was Tasha Yar, it came slap out of the blue like they do in Lost (if you're spoiler free). <br><br>A movie tracking over old ground won't cut it and a radical departure will miff off the fans. Trek should be left in peace a while, because milking the franchise dry won't help it at all.<br><br>QD
|
babel
Member
|
# Posted: 27 Oct 2006 09:22
Reply
I agree with the ever-lovely QD. 
|
stevennorton
Member
|
# Posted: 27 Oct 2006 09:29
Reply
B & B did kinda kill off Trip needlessly, and it kinda shocked me... almost as much as Frakes and Sirtis trying to look 10 years younger.
|
monny
Member
|
# Posted: 28 Oct 2006 01:50
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--stevennorton+Oct. 27 2006,09:29--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (stevennorton @ Oct. 27 2006,09:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->B & B did kinda kill off Trip needlessly, and it kinda shocked me...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Bleh...thanks for the spoiler. <!--emo&:v--><img src="http://www.outpost10f.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/bro.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':v'><!--endemo--><br>I hate Bermanprise anyway so I guess it makes no nevermind. <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.outpost10f.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smi.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo--><br><br>I agree with all those who say Trek should move forward. Why does the feel of Sci-fi have to reflect what's going on in the world right now?<br> I like the previous optimism for humankind in Trek. It's nice to daydream about the day when we on Earth get past all this ridiculous bikkering over religion, race, sexuality etc and move on to bigger and better things in the greater universe.<br>It's fiction, so why can't we fictionalize about peace on Earth...right?<br><br><br>Nov 1: Boy, do I sound like an idealist! <!--emo&:P--><img src="http://www.outpost10f.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/ton.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':P'><!--endemo-->
<br><br><!--EDIT|monny|Nov. 01 2006,04:31-->
|
lythria_2005
Member
|
# Posted: 29 Oct 2006 04:22
Reply
It's all well and good saying that a little mistake will kill the Star Trek franchise, but I think that is a mistake unto itself.
Paramount are under pressure from Fans of Trek, Friends of Trek and everyone else for that matter, to not only make a good movie, but make a new Trek series, and do you know why everyone recognises that pressure? Well I shall tell you what I think...
TOS is a cult show...meaning it is not the favourite series by a long long way. Enterprise is also a Cult show, meaning it's crap, but there are some people who liked.
Now let's look at TNG, DS9 and VOY. They are massive successes. Millions of people world wide watched Voyager, DS9 and TNG religously, and had never heard of TOS.
The fan base for Star Trek has changed hands. The fans of startrek are those everyday people that walk down the street. They are the ones that buy the magazines, and the toys, and the movies, and the dvd's. They are where the future lies for Trek.
They are the fans who want futuristic. They are the fans who want all out war, or a voyage through dangerous, never before explored space. They don't want old...they don't want dated. They want more-than-modern.
So, in other words, as long as they exist, star trek will never die, and aslong as Paramount think that they are making movies for die-hard fans, they will keep making mistakes.
Look at SG1 or SG: Atlantis...look at Battlestar Galactica...action, drama, tears...they have it all, and they are proving to be massivley successful. Perhaps Star Trek need to look at heading in that direction...getting a bit darker, a bit more modern, instead of being stupidly nostalgic about it all and risking the life of the franchise...
down with the nostalgic fan, up with a new age of Trek is what I say...
|
anth
Member
|
# Posted: 29 Oct 2006 08:34
Reply
I don't agree at all with that. It was as bad a post as Matt's was good.
But can't be bothered to argue.
btw, sorry i clicked on the wrong post to edit. Put it all back as was now.
|
babel
Member
|
# Posted: 31 Oct 2006 23:32
Reply
'TOS is a cult show...meaning it is not the favourite series by a long long way.'
what utter hogwash . . . a cult show? This is a show that has entered popular culture in many, many ways! A show that has watched and loved by millions upon milions around the world. People making a new Trek would do well to look at what made TOS so great.
TOS could be dark - City on the Edge of Forever? the lead character has to prevent one of his best friends save the love of his life. Operation Annihilate? Lead character finds his dead brother and watches his sister in law go mad and die. A colonist flies his ship into a star.
And let;s not forget Doomsday Machine - Matt Decker is driven mad with grief as he effectively kills his crew.
TOS rules!
|
lythria_2005
Member
|
# Posted: 1 Nov 2006 00:57
Reply
Yup...TOS was watched and loved by so mayn people that only 3 series aired, and the 3rd, fans had to fight for anyway..lol...
I love the way people have deluded themselves into thinking that TOS was a massive success...it was almost as big a flop as enterprise...I mean, Enterprise had more series than TOS...and yes...TOS does have it's place in the Trek history, but only because it started it, not because it was a great show...lol...
TNG, VOY, DS9 and even ENT to some extent were not designed for the "we love Trek" people who whinge on about "the series not staying faithful to gene rodenberry's vision"...lol...
TOS had some great episodes, don't get me wrong...but those great episodes, along iwht any episode of TOS were flawed in so many ways...wooden acting, bad special effects,...and you can turn round to me and say "it was the 1960's...you can;'t expect better special effects"...yes I can...shows like Doctor Who made the special effects in Trek look apauling...lol
And yes, i do lie TOS...some of the episodes...such as the one with the tribbles in, but I don't think you can sit down and make shows for the ignorant, incompetent and generaly arrognat Trek fans, and still please the massive population of normal people who watch it...
and let's face...Trek fans, such as myself, are arrogant, because we think we know best...we think we are the brai n children of Mr. Rodenberry, when in fact, we just hinder Paramount by pressuring them into making things we want...and the, when we do a bad job...we diss them...even though we are the ones they are trying to please!!!!!...
and another thing, the Trek fans who have watched every series, are a small, small proportion of the numbers who watch trek...we are out weighed byt he average joe...who really doesn't give two cookies about the franchise...but when there is a show, they watch it, beause it's Trek, and because entertaining...not because it's an epic sci-fi show...
just like those average joe's watch Dr. Who, or BSG, or SG1....
so all in all, if I was paramount, i'd be making movies for the masses...sod the Trek fans...because they are, now, in the minority...let's make movies for the average joe...and yet, every wtritter, director, producer and actor who get's involved with Trek, dilludes themselves into thinking that the majority of people, anctually care...lol...
it's highly amusing...
let me put a question to you , Anth...If you had a multibillion dollar franchise...that had a small fna following, but was watched by millions, and millions of people world wide, who really, couldn't gie to cookies if the show in question got cancelled...and also, only wanted to be entertained...which one, do you think you'd go for? the small following, or the massive massive proportion of everyday people, who could make you a very very rich man, if you got it right, just by mindlessly entertaining them...;-)...
and im not saying the shows can be bad...all im saying is that the shows don't have to be what the fans want to see...the shows just have to entertain the masses...and by going back in time...paramount are risking this...the modern day person wants futuristic not dated...;-)...
Anyway, no doubt the zionist fans among us are going to cringe when they read this...good...I enjoy being forward thinking...join in, you neverknow, you might learn something...;-)...
please note: no offense was intended by this post, although, if I have caused, I won't appologise because it was nto aimed at that sort of thing. 
|
anth
Member
|
# Posted: 1 Nov 2006 02:47
Reply
Do you think Paramount went out on a wing and made TNG? They made it because of the huge popularity of TOS and fan pressure. Pressure and popularity from all ages and many types of people. Star Trek was huge. Re runs appreciated by a whole new modern audience that ambraced the show. They went ahead and made that show with peace of mind, due to the huge fan base of Star Trek, totally brought about by TOS.
You don't mean to be offensive? I suggest you get a thesaurus then. Cos openly saying we are "delusional" is offensive btw.
If you don't believe TOS is more popular and more remembered than say DS9, go out to your local town centre and ask 100 people who is captian Kirk? and who is Benjamin Sisko? Let us know the ratio, ok?
If i was in charge of a multi million dollar franchise and was choosing a new series, i would say to myself of course we need something that will appeal to a wide range of people, that is a given. I think you'll find every entertainment TV show made for prime time starts with that at its core.
if you think you have come up with that idea yourself you're "delusional". Infact you practically copied my post from earlier in the thread anyway with your later comments.
You preach the fact it should be for the average person. Yet it's quite clear you wish it to be tailored to your tastes. Set in your choice of times within the Trek time line, and featuring the type of scenarios you favor. Revisiting something you have deluded yourself into thinking was popular is not the only way to go.
You've openly said you like the war theme, you expect a new trek to have a war story arc. Well, i would say, 3 other sci fi shows running right now all have the heroes immersed in a war with the Ori, the Wraith, and the Cylons. What can i do differently?
Lets talk about ratings. For that you have to weigh up many factors. To simply say TOS was a flop is not true. TV execs consider many things before cancelling a show. Demographics are one example. If you wish a show on your network to appeal to a certain audience and you see that show not doing well over all, but appealing and being watched by a large enough chunk of the people you wish it to appeal to, then it will not be cancelled.
Enterprise for example was a show aimed at a demographic that was not the focus of its network any longer. It regularly got more viewers than other shows that continued to run. It is not a black and white issue to say it got cancelled cos it was a flop. A show can be cancelled for many other reasons, primarily because they no longer fit in the planned demographic for its network.
UPN is well known for focusing on urban sitcoms and reality shows nowadays. Enterprise, and Trek in general does not fit this focus. Trek could move to the sci fi channel. But, it would receive about $500,000 budget an episode rather than a million plus from UPN should they make a new show. Also any trek actors would be forced to move to Canada!
But, you get the general idea? If Trek was running now on a network where the demographic for the show was seeked, everything would be fine.
Special effects and acting. TOS was made on a shoestring budget. It was also made before the pioneering techniques used in 2001 a space odysey were common practice and affordable for TV. I think they did rather well with the resources they had.
I can see past the special effects to a good story anyhow. They are good enough to tell a story.
Remember that TOS is over 40 years old. You are watching people acting in a whole other period in time. Acting is the art of portraying real people. People from 40 years ago acted and lived their lives very differently from today.
I feel very sorry for you if you can't see past things like this.
Nemesis had better FX than all seasons of TNG, Voy and DS9, but was it as good as many TNG episodes?
I would say you are not a Star Trek fan. You totally fail to embrace the concept of Star Trek and what it stands for. You're a sci fi fan who happens to like a Trek series. DS9 is the least Trek like series.
I'm sure you believe yourself to be a Trek fan though. But, as an example, i like Enterprise. I know Babel does not. However i still consider him to be a real Trek fan. I will not say "no, he can't be because he does not like every show".
He is because he appreciates and understands, he see's things you will never see.
I've been here over 5 years. Your last post was without doubt the worst i've ever read on this kind of subject.
|
monny
Member
|
# Posted: 1 Nov 2006 04:21
Reply
Is it getting hot in here or is it just me?
Blehhhhh now I can't get "The Naked Now" outta my head! 
Discussions like this just prove that the spirit of Trek and Trekkies are still alive and well, (even if those with the money and rights to make shows and movies are not quite with us).
Long Live the Federation!
|
babel
Member
|
# Posted: 1 Nov 2006 12:23
Reply
Granted, TOS struggled to find its audience in its original run - the reasons for this are well-documented but chief amongst these was perhaps the poor scheduling.
But you overlook the HUGE ratings TOS enjoyed in syndication.
And I DO take offense at being labelled 'delusional' and I suggest you owe us an apology, Lythria.
|
wilbur_force
Member
|
# Posted: 2 Nov 2006 00:49
Reply
I want a DS9 movie!!! that would kick some serious butt with the greatness but noooooooo lets do a post-prequel (if that is the phrase 2 be used) why??? why not an academy movie or a voyager or anything else except that!!! I say they should stop and think what there doing seriously before they make a horrible mistake and have millions of fans hunting them down and beating them like a circus monkey!!!
*Rant Terminated*
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 2 Nov 2006 07:58
Reply
You know, I never thought the TNG movies were a disaster. I watched them all again recently and Nemesis is growing on me! I never thought it would. Sure, Generations was just a glorified episode with Kirk in it, and I haven't watched it since the first year it came out, but Star Trek IS a limited audience! Very few shows will capture everybody who watches them, I don't know why we expect sci fi shows to appeal to every person who watches tv in order to declare it good.
Even within the Trek crowd there are splits. Folks who like DS9 tended to also like ENT. People who were huge TNG fans tended to gravitate toward VOY. The TOSers evolved into one or the other depending on their personal likes and dislikes. Personally, I think ENT was Rick Berman's personal nail in the ST coffin as an attempt to draw in new ST fans instead of keeping the old ones. That and Archer makes me barf.
Making a ST movie with all new characters in an all new setting in the ST universe is an attempt at capturing an audience who knows nothing about Star Trek. They don't need to know how Bones always said "He's dead, Jim" or the fact that Worf is not a merry man, or that Janeway's hair has gone where no hair should go, or that DS9 was a rotating soap opera. They can just enjoy the new movie without knowing backstory. However - removing all the familiar characters that we as Trek fans have come to know and love will alienate us. Berman is sacrificing the current fan base for a new fan base. That's his choice.
I personally am disappointed in what he's done with ST in the past few years and it doesn't look good for the future. I will watch the pilot episodes of any new series that come out, I may check into the new movies, but until he brings back Star Trek, he can consider me not a trekkie.
|
cmdr_worf
Member
|
# Posted: 3 Nov 2006 07:25
Reply
I enjoy all incarnations of Trek, and whilst recognising there are poor episodes amongst them (Spocks brain anyone?)
I will wait until I see the film before putting it down.
I think that after a "well deserved rest for the franchise" it is time for a return. There are lots of things happenning in the world right now that need to be addressed, and social commentary is what Star Trek has always been good at.
Obviously there are a lot of conflicting views on this emotive subject, as we all have a personal opinion of what direction Trek should take, and all believe that our ideas are the best. Personally, I'm just miffed that Berman couldn't find a way to incorporate everyone's favourite Klingon into 'Enterprise' lol  ...
...Qapla'!
|
aeon
Member
|
# Posted: 3 Nov 2006 08:51
Reply
I absolutely agree with Worf. It's like he's reading my mind.
|
