Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Star Drek

Topic Closed

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Star Drek (Page 2)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 10 11 12

Author

Topic: Star Drek

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-19-2008 02:41 PM

I thought the new movie trailer had some pretty cool stuff in it.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about all the endless chronological minutiae.

This Star Trek reboot will be guaranteed to suck ass if they fill a bunch of it with talky scenes full of back story and obscure references that only geeks out the hard core fans. And if the story line needs a whole bunch of talky set up for the rest of us to figure out what's happening it will such ass as well.

Simply put, this new Star Trek movie needs to be able to stand on its own and work for anyone who has never seen a previous Star Trek TV series or movie for it to be any good.

| IP: Logged

Joe Tommassello
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 547
From: Coatesville, PA, USA
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 11-19-2008 02:53 PM

quote: Mike Schindler
Reboots are all the rage these days.

Yeah. So are pink Blackberrys.

BTW, the James Bond series never got or needed a "reboot". They simply change the actor when the current one gets too old or expensive or hard to deal with.

| IP: Logged

Mark Strube
Master Film Handler

Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007

posted 11-19-2008 03:17 PM

I personally think the trailer kind of kicks ass. Finally Star Trek looks properly "updated" to our time. The movies were getting quite stale, if they had any hope of keeping the film franchise going this was direly needed. I would've personally been fine with all-new characters to follow, but I must admit, the Kirk backstory will be cool to see.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-19-2008 03:29 PM

quote: Ken Lackner
Then why is he portraying Kirk as the first commander of the Enterprise? That simply is not correct. Period.

Are they? And even if they are, the thing we have to keep in mind is that there is time travel in this movie. Abrams has said that while this movie is canon, characters from the original series could die, and it'll still work. That suggests to me that events in this movie will start a new timeline, kind of like in BACK TO THE FUTURE.

quote: Ken Lackner
We would not be Star Trek fans without our nerdy hangups.

True.

quote: Ken Lackner
Scotty's uniform was red in The Original Series. So where's the hangup?

You're forgetting that in WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE, there were no red uniforms. Everyone wore yellow or blue. Scotty wore yellow. So did Spock, but I think he wore blue in THE CAGE. Sulu's was blue, but that's because he was some sort of scientist at first. Anyway, you get the idea...

quote: Chris Slycord
Gene Roddenberry disagrees. Though I'm not sure why.

Hint: Roddenberry and Paramount choose to ignore the animated series as not being so-called official canon.

I think this has something to do with Gene Roddenberry being a loser. The DS9 guys found ways to make the animated series fit into continuity, so I say it counts.

quote: Joe Tommassello
BTW, the James Bond series never got or needed a "reboot". They simply change the actor when the current one gets too old or expensive or hard to deal with.

That's true of the first 20 movies, but I think that most people, including the creators, are in agreement that CASINO ROYALE is a reboot. And while the series may not have needed it, I for one am happy that it got it. Otherwise, we may have never known what we were missing. [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 11-19-2008 04:37 PM

Well. I appear to have been out-nerded. Touché.

I have never seen a single episode of The Animated Series. So where would I have heard the name Robert April, and how would I know he was (questionably?) the first captain? I have, however, heard that, for some reason, TAS does not count, and I never got that. Anyone know why?

quote: Chris Slycord
As mentioned above, Pike is in the movie.

It appears Mike and I were composing our posts at the same time. I chose to leave mine as-is rather than edit it.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Simply put, this new Star Trek movie needs to be able to stand on its own and work for anyone who has never seen a previous Star Trek TV series or movie for it to be any good.

I won't disagree with that a bit. But it shouldn't contradict any previous Star Trek, either.

quote: Mark Strube
I personally think the trailer kind of kicks ass. Finally Star Trek looks properly "updated" to our time. The movies were getting quite stale.

Now that I will disagree with. Strongly. I loved all of the TNG movies, except Generations, and I didn't hate that one as much as most people did. Nemesis was great. But that's just my opinion, of course.

I don't know how do do a quote-within-a-quote. In response to my comment about this film portraying Kirk as the first captain of the Enterprise, Mike said

quote: Mike Schindler
Are they?

It certainly seems like it. If not, I'll be impressed.

quote: Mike Schindler
You're forgetting that in WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE, there were no red uniforms. Everyone wore yellow or blue. Scotty wore yellow. So did Spock, but I think he wore blue in THE CAGE.

Good point. I did forget about that. There were no bright red uniforms, but I thought there was a kind of not-quite-gold-almost-slightly-orangish version?

Why is this in Ground Level and not Yak?

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-19-2008 04:40 PM

Cue Mike Heenan with his [sleep]

trademark.
[Razz]

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-19-2008 05:59 PM

In regards to this movie showing Kirk as the first Enterprise captain, I'm not so sure. Certainly, that is the implication in the trailer, but I think there's going to be a lot of jumping around from one time period to another in this movie.

Also, the writers, who are huge geeks who post on Star Trek forums themselves, have said that Kirk's uniform is black, because in this movie, he's still a cadet.

So even if this movie is about the Enterpise's first mission (which I'm guessing it's not), they could still fudge facts a little bit by saying that Cadet Kirk was given command of the Enterprise for its first mission for some reason or another before its first captain, be that April or Pike, was assigned to the ship permanently.

| IP: Logged

Shane Cooper
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 232
From: Little Rock, Arkansas
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 11-19-2008 09:30 PM

While we are all getting our nerd on here, I wanted to provide a link that is relevant to the conversation.

Aint It Cool News Star Trek

I consider myself a Star Trek fan, I am looking forward to this for a couple of reasons. 1) It doesn't feel like what has come before, and lets be honest, recently that hasn't been a whole lot; 2) I like J.J. Abrams and I am willing to put forth some faith until he proves me unwise.

Now, to get my super-blerd on, I watched this trailer back-to-back with the second Watchmen trailer. I though Watchmen blew it out of the water!

| IP: Logged

Tristan Lane
Master Film Handler

Posts: 444
From: Nampa, Idaho
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-19-2008 09:52 PM

quote: Darryl Spicer
They had one of the original design ships in an episode of Enterprise along with the Tholians creating their webs. In a Mirror Darkly I believe was the title of that episode. It was two parts and was in the final season.

Hey,

Don't forget about that one TNG episode where the find Scotty trapped in the Transporter buffer. He then goes to the Holodeck and walks on to the bridge of the original series.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-19-2008 10:06 PM

And then of course, there was TRIALS AND TRIBBLE-ATIONS, which had the DS9 crew running around the original Enterprise while THE TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES was going on. Fun stuff.

| IP: Logged

Julie Lucero
Film Handler

Posts: 37
From: Valencia, California, USA
Registered: Sep 2008

posted 11-20-2008 09:02 AM

quote: Mike Schindler
I think the only way to make a financially successful Star Trek movie these days is to do something that appeals to a larger audience.

This seems to be what they did with the fourth movie (THE VOYAGE HOME) by incorporating the time-travel element so the story could be contemporary and adding the ecology/saving the whales theme. In fact, to date the fourth movie is the only TREK flick to top the magical $100 million threshold domestically.

It's interesting that the lowest-grossing is the most recent, not so much because that one (NEMESIS) stunk, but because the grossing potential is so much greater these days what with the theater counts and aggressive advertising.

Here's a breakdown of the ten TREK movies and their domestic box office performance (courtesy of boxofficemojo.com).

STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE
Year of release: 1979
Gross: $82.3 million

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN
Year of release: 1982
Gross: $78.9

STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK
Year of release: 1984
Gross: $76.5

STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME
Year of release: 1986
Gross: $109.7

STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER
Year of release: 1989
Gross: $52.2

STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY
Year of release: 1991
Gross: $74.9

STAR TREK: GENERATIONS
Year of release: 1994
Gross: $75.7

STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT
Year of release: 1996
Gross: $92.1

STAR TREK: INSURRECTION
Year of release: 1998
Gross: $70.2

STAR TREK: NEMESIS
Year of release: 2002
Gross: $43.3

How do you think the new movie will do?

| IP: Logged

Joe Tommassello
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 547
From: Coatesville, PA, USA
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 11-20-2008 11:25 AM

quote: Julie Lucero
How do you think the new movie will do?

Probably better than all the previous ones even though it looks like it will suck ass for REAL Star Trek fans.

| IP: Logged

Blaine Young
Master Film Handler

Posts: 477
From: Kirkland, WA, USA
Registered: Sep 2006

posted 11-20-2008 12:01 PM

Back to the Captain of the Enterprise issue. According to "official" Star Trek timelines, the Enterprise was launched in 2245. Kirk was 12 (Born March 22, 2233) - and didn't enter the academy until 2250. We can make some broad sweaping assumptions from the trailer, but his riding up on the motorcycle and watching the construction of "a ship" (which we all assume is "Enterprise") raises some valid concerns - he's clearly not 12 in the shot. Of course, that shot also kinda reminded me of "Maverick" in Top Gun.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-20-2008 12:51 PM

But a lot of stuff in the official timeline, including the 2245 launch date, is conjecture. That date came from Roddenberry, who said that the ship was 20 years old at the start of the original series. But that's never explicitly stated anywhere in the show. What is explicitly stated is that the Enterprise is 20 years old in STAR TREK III. That date doesn't make any sense, which is why they went with the earlier one for the official timeline.

But what it boils down to is 2245 is not canon, and 2265 doesn't make sense. Because of that, I think they should be able to make up whatever date they want.

| IP: Logged

Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 11-20-2008 03:00 PM

Even if we never heard it spoken on screen, if Mr. Rodenberry himself said it, why shouldn't we take it as canon? Why shouldn't scripts be written to jive with what he's said?

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 10 11 12

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.