Best Star trek movie

[Reply #120 on:]

I'm too much of an old TOS fan.  They're already screwing with canon by making Spock a full-blooded Vulcan instead of a half-Human half-Vulcan hybrid.  The Romulans from the future are trying to kill Kirk.  Why?  The Klingons were the ones that hated Kirk.  Spock was the one who surrendered to the Romulans and stole valuable military technology from them.

I'm sure that I will detest every moment of this recasted prequel.

If Hollywood wants a decent Trek movie, call the boys in Finland.  The gang of Star Wreck have proven that they can make a fantastic movie on a tight budget.  Give them some Hollywood money and watch them work.

Of course I'm an old, ancient fan.  I guess I should be more tolerant of fresh ideas...

Oh Hell No!  I'm gonna stick my heels in the sand as I take my Geritol tablets and DEMAND that Spock continue to be a Vulcan/Human hybrid.

[Reply #121 on:]

His mother is Winona Ryder.

[Reply #122 on:]

 

Originally posted by Nixorbo:

His mother is Winona Ryder.

DON'T REMIND ME!!!!   

All I can say about that is:  There better be a security guard to protect personal belongings.  Ms. Ryder has sticky fingers.

[Reply #123 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:

Oh Hell No! I'm gonna stick my heels in the sand as I take my Geritol tablets and DEMAND that Spock continue to be a Vulcan/Human hybrid.

What the hell!? When did he change? What have I missed?

I just watched Journey to Babel yesterday. Amanda was quite definitely Spock's mother, and she was quite definitely human. And that, my friends, was quite definitely canon.

I have a feeling I am going to be outraged!...

[Reply #124 on:]

Spock = pure Vulcan? What? Surely Nimoy of all people would have corrected that... error in the script before signing on?

[Reply #125 on:]

Amazing how close some of the fan-made trailers got to the final product.

Ah well, if nothing else, the film will be a chance to see the NCC-1701 in fully-updated, 21st century HD glory.

[Reply #126 on:]

 

Originally posted by Xanfor:
Blimey, this had better be good...

If the film actually features the construction of the Enterprise, then the canon states that her first Captain is Robert April... yet the character of Christopher Pike (the SECOND Captain) has been cast...
Grrr...

[Reply #127 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:
They're already screwing with canon by making Spock a full-blooded Vulcan instead of a half-Human half-Vulcan hybrid.

Spock a full-blooded Vulcan?  SACRELIGE, SACRELIGE I SAY!

[Reply #128 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:

Of course I'm an old, ancient fan.  I guess I should be more tolerant of fresh ideas...

I refused to watch the new Battlestar Galactica when it first aired because I grew up with the original and didn't like the latitudes taken in the new series.  Turns out it's a pretty damn good show, so a "re-imagining" can be done, but I think it's an exception rather than the norm.  Carry on with your skepticism, man, you'll probably end up being right. 

That being said, the last Trek movie was pretty bland.  Obviously the writers have run out of ideas for the TNG style stuff.  Hardly anyone has the nuts to go and write (or fund) completely new material, so the only place Trek can go is back to the beginning.

[Reply #129 on:]

So now Spock is a full Vulcan? Winona rider is Spock's mom? That's it I'm not seeing the movie. Once stomeone messes with stuff that's been canon for 41 years them you have throughly fucked up. I'll stick with TOS and the first 6 movies thank you very much. Possibly TNG and Voyage once I actually see them if I like them.

I maybe a new trekkie but even I know Star Trek history better than this.

[Reply #130 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:
Of course I'm an old, ancient fan.  I guess I should be more tolerant of fresh ideas...

Ben Stiller has been cast as Khan.

Hah, I kid, I kid...

[Reply #131 on:]

Where are your guys getting the info for the new movie from anyway?

[Reply #132 on:]

Google Future.
You can read news reports that haven't happened yet.

[Reply #133 on:]

Has anybody found out who Abrams is casting as Welshy? 

[Reply #134 on:]

I hear he's thinking of Nick Frost...

I just hope that they won't retcon too much. The best would be if they didn't retcon anything, but that's not going to happen. I'm most looking forward to Quinto and Nimoy for this movie. Otherwise, it seems pretty crappy to me. It could've used more Shatner.

[Reply #135 on:]

 

Originally posted by i_c_weiner:
It could've used more Shatner.

Old Kirk is dead.
Dead dead dead.
Picard stole his toupé before burying him.

Also - where did folk get the info that they're making Spock a full-Vulcan? That sounds dubious to me...

[Reply #136 on:]

 

Originally posted by coldangel_1:
 Old Kirk is dead.
Dead dead dead.
Picard stole his toupé before burying him.

Kirk is awesome how could they have killed him?

 

Also - where did folk get the info that they're making Spock a full-Vulcan? That sounds dubious to me...

That's why I was asking where the info came from.

[Reply #137 on:]

 

Originally posted by Bendersfan1221:
 Kirk is awesome how could they have killed him?

In a suitably heroic manner.
Didn't you see Generations?

[Reply #138 on:]

 

Originally posted by Bendersfan1221:

 That's why I was asking where the info came from.

Trekmovie.com.  I'll find the appropriate link later.  It was state when it was revealed that Winnona "Sticky Fingers" Ryder was to be cast as Spock's mother.

[Reply #139 on:]

Bad Snarty.

No one here has any optimism anymore. I hope that I will not be alone in actually waiting to see this movie before passing judgement. I've heard no explict negative news in order to entice me to do so, and in fact, I've heard loads of great stuff from Mr. Nimoy himself. Really, Amanda a Vulcan, Ralph? It's more along the lines of common sense; not listening to rubbish like that...

[Reply #140 on:]

To Xanfor:

You do realize that startrek.com is now a dead website?  The webmaster and crew were fired immedately after giving support to the Writer's Strike back in December.  Any "updates" are suspect to me - even when it was still operational.

What do you expect Nimoy to say?  "The movie is a smoldering piece of crap?"  Please - it's the first paying gig he's had since he was hawking Motrin a couple of years ago.  He's obviously brain damaged from photographing all those hideously obese women over the years.

As for the weekly thing on Trekmovie.com with comments about Shatner not being involved in the movie - in wrestling it's call "a work".  Shatner's participation while the movie is being filmed is publicity.  You can be sure his fat, bloated, bald, egotistical self will be involved in the movie.

This movie will be worse than the "Lost In Space" movie from a few years ago.

[Reply #141 on:]

 

Originally posted by coldangel_1:
 In a suitably heroic manner.
Didn't you see Generations?

Not yet. I figured that I should at least see more than one TNG episode. And I mean why did they kill him.

Xan I will only see it if and only if I actually see good reviews from the fan s who saw it, and if nothing gets fucked up which by the looks of thinngs they've already done.

[Reply #142 on:]

Ralph: in general I agree with your cynicism, particurlarly about Nimoy's involvement, but on the specific point of him being full vulcan, this seems to be an artifact; nothing official (That I've been able to find) supports it, it seems to have started ith the official report that Ryder was playing Spock's mother. Since fact checking is sooo 20th century, bloggers and other online "reporters" who didn't know better simply paraphrased this to "Ryder to play Vulcan" because they didn't know spock's mom was human and began speculating from there. Trek fans desperate for info see these stories and report back to the community... and outrage ensues.

I may be wrong, but I've looked a bit and found no official basis for this rumor.

[Reply #143 on:]

I came to a decision.  While I have deep reservations about the quality of this movie, stemming from several objections I have, I'm still going to see it.

But I've learned my lesson from Cloverfield and am only hitting up a matinee.

[Reply #144 on:]

^ Agree with..

even if it gets bad reviews it will still far more good and familiar than the ussuallstuff that pops up in the screens.. wich makes me not want to go to cinema in ages.. last movie i saw in one was the Simpsons

[Reply #145 on:]

Higher quality.

One Star Trek Teaser Trailer Please.

Did post this in the trailer thread but maybe better suited for here.

[Reply #146 on:]

 

Originally posted by Bendersfan1221:
 Not yet.

Just watch it. You don't need to have seen TNG, just be aware of its existence.

[Reply #147 on:]

I would ask how they are going to:

Show spoiler

make work the fact that the old NCC-1701 was built....ON EARTH??
I thought it was supposed to be beuilt in space..
Now the Memory Alpha wiki says its built on earth but assambled in space... but in the shot we see it beign assambled in ground?

And they should bring in April who was the build supervisor and first captain of the Big E... something tells me that they will not ..

maybe they will even dare to make Kirk the first captain?

[Reply #148 on:]

Javier - the construction shot might just be promotional material, not an actual scene form the film. I'd hope so, because arc-welders!?

I mentioned Robert April earlier. He hasn't been cast, but Kirk won't be Captain because Captain Christopher Pike (TOS: The Cage, The Menagerie) has been cast.
He's NCC-1701's second Captain, I know...

[Reply #149 on:]

Ok coldy. I'll watch it. just to make you happy. Why would they skip over a whole captain of the Enterprise? That;s stupid. Maybe Pike will be at the academy. Let me get my hany-dandy Star Trek chronology book and check that in a bit.

[Reply #150 on:]

Star Trek Teaser Trailer

It's fucking beautiful.


Btw, I agree with coldangel. The teaser footage is most likely NOT from the finished film.
It's however fitting to show the construction of the Enterprise, since this film is essentially a relanuch of the series.
Also, the Enterprise was built on Earth...unless the San Francisco Fleet Yard is just orbiting above the city.   

[Reply #151 on:]

By canon, the Enterprise, Constitution class, NCC 1701 was built in 2245.  It's first CO was Robert April (revealed and accepted as canon from ST: TAS).  The next CO was Christopher Pike and then James T. Kirk.

Also by canon, the Constitution Class Starship is not designed to land on planets or enter their atmosphere (Tomorrow is Yesterday).

So is the Enterprise getting a major refit or they altering canon by making this a new ship?  Is it being build on land to be launched or is in an enclosed space staion orbitng Earth?

Granted it is a beautiful sight.

[Reply #152 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:
So is the Enterprise getting a major refit or they altering canon by making this a new ship?  Is it being build on land to be launched or is in an enclosed space staion orbitng Earth?

Just because it's not supposed on a planet doesn't mean that it wasn't built on one. 

Besides, the text of the TOS Enterprise dedication plaque said 'San Francisco, California' and not 'San Francisco Fleet Yard.' The latter comes from the Enterprise-A dedication plaque. Well, nobody is perfect.

Also, a lot that has been said about the Enterprise's capabilities is subject to 'script logic', although given its size and shape it is not really suprising that it's not supposed to land on a planet.

[Reply #153 on:]

Yeap.. its curious that the technological huge more advanced Constitution class 100 years more advanced than the NX class is not able to fly into atmosferes and the NX can (in one ep they bombed some target in NY past and they fly into the atmosfere clearly... )

Anyway.. in the "New Voyages" fan eps, they say they try to keep to canon (they even dare to say they are canon......) in "In Harm`s way" we see a constitution class, the USS Farragout flying throught atmosfere.. and then after in the same point the Enterprise...

[Reply #154 on:]

Yeah, but the NX's shape is more conducive to actually landing.  Landing struts for the NCC would be prohibitively large, they'd take up the majority of the nacelle section.

[Reply #155 on:]

Sometimes hi-tech things can't do things that older versions can, for example planes in the Second World War could take off and land from short grass strips but modern aircraft need long hard runways to operate from.

[Reply #156 on:]

Nobody wants to hear about your long hard runway, Tweek.

[Reply #157 on:]

atjum ... Harriers ... F-35B .. YAK-141.. Balzak.. no wait..that was rubbish

 

[Reply #158 on:]

 

Originally posted by Javier Lopez:
Yeap.. its curious that the technological huge more advanced Constitution class 100 years more advanced than the NX class is not able to fly into atmosferes and the NX can (in one ep they bombed some target in NY past and they fly into the atmosfere clearly... )

NCC-1701 flew into Earth's atmosphere in that episode where they accidentally went back in time and brought that Air Force pilot onboard... I forget the name.

[Reply #159 on:]

I think the episode was called "Tomorrow is Yesterday".

God, knowing the name of that episode off the top of my head is so frickin' nerdly, it makes me sick...