Comments on: New Old Enterprise

By: telefony komórkowe samsung

telefony komórkowe samsung — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 07:21:15 +0000

Thanks for the information, I really enjoyed the post.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:14:59 +0000

Well, all I have to say to the “cannon” fans is that if you reference the old comic books you’ll find that this design IS actually cannon. In addition, the adjustment of the time line POST creation of the Enterprise would no doubt change the overall design of the ship from what we’re all used to. It’s completely valid.

The problem with everyone talking “cannon” is that the original Enterprise (movie) wasn’t a cannon design. NCC-1701 looked nothing like NCC-1701 from the TV show. The design change shouldn’t have come until the “A” variant, but regardless it happened. Consider that before referencing the issues with the “new” design.

By: The Dude

The Dude — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:28:41 +0000

Yea, BSG was dead. And now it’s back.

And you know, it’s by far the best show on TV.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:03:00 +0000

Battlestar Galactica was dead. There was NO fanbase there. Hadn’t even been on TV (without cheese factor repeats on late night sci-fi network) for decades.

Just sayin.

By: The Dude

The Dude — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:33:14 +0000

Box,

I think you need to take into account that what played out on the screen in Transformers had more to do with Michael Bay that it did Orci and Kurtzman. Sure they wrote it but after that they probably had zero control on how it translated to the screen.

With Trek it will be more of a collaboration between the writers, producers and JJ rather than the ruling iron fist of Michael Bay. I think that Orci and Kurtzman are fine writers and I don’t think you’ll be disappointed with Trek.

I do agree with you that Trek isn’t (or wasn’t) dead. Rodney said that it was before but he’s certainly wrong on that point. If it was dead there would be no bringing it back. Head on over to Trekmovie.com, read the blog and check out the number of comments on each post. Usually way over 100. No movies and no series does not a dead franchise make.

By: Box

Box — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:14:49 +0000

Rodney,
I don’t think bad of you just because we don’t agree. I would love to have some beers with you and talk trek or movies/pop culture all day long.
But really, come on now, ever single interview JJ gives he starts off by insulting the fans and talks down about old school trek. If you don’t see that then we must not be reading the same articles. Now think about it, if you were making a movie that was supposed to breath new life into something that hasn’t been a huge money making (key word here) hit in a while, why would you insult the fan base and the previous incarnations of what came before? Seems like a bad idea to me. Not a good way to motivate people to see your film based on something they love.
The trek franchise may have not had a movie or TV show out in the last few years, but it’s hardly dead. Think about it. I know you know this. There are tons of new toys, comics, books, clothes, and other assorted merchandise coming out all the time that are related to all facets of Trek. Just because there was no new movie coming out or no current TV show does not mean it was dead. Just because the actors aren’t huge on the convention circuit doesn’t mean jack. really. If Shatner or Nimoy showed up at a con, people would flip out
Star Trek would have lived on forever (and will) in many forms besides new movies and TV shows with out JJ’s new Trek film.
Now I don’t completely dislike JJ Abrams. I’m a huge Lost fan. I enjoyed Cloverfield. Yes I know he was a producer on that film. I don’t enjoy the other stuff he’s worked on. JJ and others need to stop treating all trek fans like we’re all just like the comic book guy from the Simpsons. It’s a very unfair stereotype that doesn’t really apply to most fans of Sci-fi in this day and age. Sci-fi fans have always been the targets for ridicule just because they are passionate about something they love. Really it’s no different then being a huge sports fan. You know what? Obama is a trek fan and he reads Conan comics. If the president of the USA is a trek fan then maybe it’s time to stop dissing on folks who are passionate about Trek.
I really didn’t like the writing on the transformers film and I’m worried a lot of the same tone will be thrown in on this film.
So there you go.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:52:29 +0000

I didn’t say it didn’t deserve to be given up on, but that the fans were not blindly following it. Or following at all.

By: The Dude

The Dude — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:41:15 +0000

I know that at the very least this new movie will be entertaining. I’m not expecting it to blow my mind or anything. But some Trek purists won’t like it no matter how good it is. And that’s their perogative.

But I’m on the side that feels like Trek has been a dying franchise (not dead yet Rodney!) and I have a really good feeling that this movie will be able to revive it.

And Rodney, you said that the fans abandoned Trek long before Enterprise. That may be true to some extent, but the truth is, Enterprise got so bad that I stopped watching, or rather, I only watched if I had nothing better to do. And that’s the creative team’s fault and has nothing to do with the fans. As much as I love Star Trek, I’m not going to watch if it sucks.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:31:09 +0000

And to prove my point Box. All you are doing is shit talking JJ, and in the process trying to shit talk me.

I’m not “on his dick” and I dont think his vision for the franchise is fucked up at all.

I also didn’t say this was a guaranteed success, just that everything I have seen so far looks awesome. If it tanks, then it tanks. But so far everything looks great and there has been a LOT of respect for the property to pay tribute to what came before.

The franchise has not “withstood” 40 years of ups and downs. If it wasnt for this reboot, there would be no franchise. The fans have given up their support, Trek celebrities are not a draw at conventions, and the studios wouldnt take a chance on another movie or TV series until this idea came forward.

You can shit talk all you want. You wont offend me. Because your assumptions about me are not accurate. See how that works?

By: Box

Box — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:23:14 +0000

Rodney,
I didn’t have time to respond to you yesterday.
Just because JJ’s shit talking makes people angry does not make said shit talking true nor does it mean that the people who are offended by it are socially inept. Example: If I said you are a fucking turd with a fucked up way of looking at things, does not mean that it’s true? Of course not. JJ coming out an publicly dissing trek fans and dissing the original show does nothing but make him look like an arrogant dick wad with no respect for a property (and the folks who love it) that has withstood 40+ years of ups and downs with out his retarded ass and his fucking REBOOT! You need to get off JJ’s dick and understand that it’s perfectly fine for trek fans to question JJ’s fucked up vision of what he thinks trek should be. I really hope the movie is good or you both can eat shit and rightly so.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:49:32 +0000

And now you see what its like when someone tries to make a statement based on their own interpretation of what you said.

You twist the definition of Science Fiction to disqualify shows that don’t meet your tastes, but if someone does it to your words, its not acceptable.

Classic.

By: michael

michael — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:15:03 +0000

I never said there’s anything wrong with focusing on a story but if people want to twist my words into “witty” sarcasm for their own amusement, work away