JJ ABRAMS Enterprise
- Thread starter Jet Beetle
- Start date
d_jedi1
Sr Member
Well... it doesn't necessarily bother me about the scanners, I just thought it was funny. I know a little about "found" items but I WILL be interested to see what they're used for in the film.
Please god don't let them be for flying the ship...
I wonder if the "recoil" is on the actuall prop or a just a feature of the toy
Capt MarVell
Sr Member
Re: JJ AMBRANS Enterprise
Compared to the nacellas of the new ship...
UNCIRCUMSCISED
Versus the nacellas of the original...
CIRCUMSCISED
[/quote]
Compared to the nacellas of the new ship...
UNCIRCUMSCISED
Versus the nacellas of the original...
CIRCUMSCISED
Re: JJ AMBRANS Enterprise
:confused (I'll NEVER be able to un-see that now...)
That is the most Freudian thing in this entire thread... Frank, tell me about your muzzer...
-Sarge
[/quote]Compared to the nacellas of the new ship...
UNCIRCUMSCISED
Versus the nacellas of the original...
CIRCUMSCISED
:confused (I'll NEVER be able to un-see that now...)
That is the most Freudian thing in this entire thread... Frank, tell me about your muzzer...
-Sarge
NakedMoleRat
Legendary Member
I was just thinking, if this had been the big E-D, we'd all have been saying how awesome cool it was. (Albeit, it would have been 21 years ago)
Jeez, can you imagine the insanity that would have happened online had the internet been around (to the degree it is today) in those early pre-TNG days ? the horror!
Judi Dench is in the new bond flics, playing M. And it's a reboot. Precedent has been set elsewhere, so I don' think you're offering a sound piece of reasoning.
My interpretation of the whole thing is this: it's canon, but the audience is seeing the events "through different lenses". Where the 60's show saw the events through one set of lenses, this new movie is looking into the same universe, just with a different set of eyes as those used to see those earlier adventures.
At least, that's ONE way they could patch up the whole continuity/but-it-looks-different issue.
I'm not too concerned about it. if there's one thing an audience member MUST bring to the table to a trek movie is a solid suspension of disbelief. If I'm going to believe that a ship designed that clumsily (and I'm talking about ANY incarnation of the enterprise) can fly, that it can fly at warp speeds, that they have tranporters, that hot chicks hold high ranking positions in a quasi-military organization, that the only difference between us and folks from other planets is their foreheads/ears/blood color, that engineering crisiseses can be overcome in a matter of hours... I'm willing to accept that I'm seeing the same universe through different eyes. It just doesn't bother me that much.
Dismiss me as a trek fan if you will. If anything, I'd like to suggest that I'm the boldest of trek fans: one willing to accept that the look/lore must be updated with the changing times in order to make sense to a more sophisticated (or perhaps just different) audience. Fact is, the viewing sensibilities of people have changed since the late sixties. Whether you like it or not, approve of it or not, believe it's the result of intelligence or stupidity, things have changed. What worked for audiences then won't work today. Heck, recall that it didn't really work for audiences then! The show was cancelled after three years
Would you expect the space battles to be the same as they were in TOS? Is the fact that battles now consist of more than three or four library shots of the enterprise veering right/left and firing offensive?? Doesn't that violate all that was established in earlier movies??? If they can update the action sequences without uprooting the nature of the franchise, is a paint job, some aztecs, micro patterns and silver phasers really going to kill it?
I dunno, but I'm willing to find out. JJ, consider my ten bucks yours! Heck, I may even try to wrangle up a girl to go with me to the movie!!!
I know, I know... crazy talk.
B-Movie Zombie
Sr Member
I agree with MattMuson statement! :thumbsup
Yeah and how many Bonds have their been? That is not a good comparison - the role of Bond has been fastened for new actors to step in and out of and almost everytime a new actor took over it was like a reboot, meaning Roger Moore never used the rocketpack or Pierce never drove the lotus.
This new trek is a cheat (or prequoot as I would call it). A way to step in and use the names of dead men to sell product (I don't mean "dead" literally). People know Kirk, People know Trek, it's mental real estate that they can do with what they will and then scratch their heads when adding money doesn't bring back what TOS was. Course they won't care - people will spend money on the new toys and other junk out there.
You're dismissed.
You were a lost cause anyway with all those blinky lighted tricorders (as nice as they are).
lol
AnubisGuard
Master Member
Seconded. :thumbsup
switchblade_slinger
Well-Known Member
Amen, Matt.
I get up every morning here in South Orange County, California... Every morning I watch captain Kirk as I put my shoes on and make my breakfast from Six-to-six-twenty-AM, and I look at every scene through the lens of my childhood, through the lens of the period in which the series was made. I was not old enough to see Star Trek when it was originally aired. but when Star Trek reran on channel five when I was a kid, I never watched it. It was 'too hoakey'. I was looking at the series through the eyes of a kid born in the last days of 1969... Star Wars trumped everything, and anything else was goofy and kinda (don't take offense at my vernacular) ... gay. I was seven when Star Wars came out. I was more familiar with the Star Trek CARTOON than anything else. After GEorge Lucas, old-timey Star Trek just wasn't up to snuff. However, when the Star Trek movies came out, I watched them all in the theater. I even remember an 'exhibit' in my theater lobby in Riverside, California of Star Trek props (some handmade by the exhibitor... I remember distinctly the person who made some of these props telling me that the 'microphone pickups' on the Klingon communicator were Gilette or Norelco electric razor blade covers. Who was that guy???? Was it Richard Coyle? My memory is fuzzy.. I was just a kid...)... It led me down the path I am on to this day...
The point is, imagination is everything. The Star Trek origin is a story that is strong enough to need retelling. For someone with an obvious gift like JJ Abrams to take up the reins and attack the task with a voracious appetite... it makes me happy. I like it. My friends and I used to play 'Starfleet Battles' in the late eighties at a hobby shop around the corner from the theater where I saw the first four Star Trek movies in Riverside... I don't think any one of us would have begrudged the films any artistic lisence for their wavering from the 'original vision'.
Maybe I've had too much whiskey.
Maybe I'm too nostalgic.
But gosh-darnit, I am looking forward to the 'Lost/Star Trek' creative hybrid.
SS
I get up every morning here in South Orange County, California... Every morning I watch captain Kirk as I put my shoes on and make my breakfast from Six-to-six-twenty-AM, and I look at every scene through the lens of my childhood, through the lens of the period in which the series was made. I was not old enough to see Star Trek when it was originally aired. but when Star Trek reran on channel five when I was a kid, I never watched it. It was 'too hoakey'. I was looking at the series through the eyes of a kid born in the last days of 1969... Star Wars trumped everything, and anything else was goofy and kinda (don't take offense at my vernacular) ... gay. I was seven when Star Wars came out. I was more familiar with the Star Trek CARTOON than anything else. After GEorge Lucas, old-timey Star Trek just wasn't up to snuff. However, when the Star Trek movies came out, I watched them all in the theater. I even remember an 'exhibit' in my theater lobby in Riverside, California of Star Trek props (some handmade by the exhibitor... I remember distinctly the person who made some of these props telling me that the 'microphone pickups' on the Klingon communicator were Gilette or Norelco electric razor blade covers. Who was that guy???? Was it Richard Coyle? My memory is fuzzy.. I was just a kid...)... It led me down the path I am on to this day...
The point is, imagination is everything. The Star Trek origin is a story that is strong enough to need retelling. For someone with an obvious gift like JJ Abrams to take up the reins and attack the task with a voracious appetite... it makes me happy. I like it. My friends and I used to play 'Starfleet Battles' in the late eighties at a hobby shop around the corner from the theater where I saw the first four Star Trek movies in Riverside... I don't think any one of us would have begrudged the films any artistic lisence for their wavering from the 'original vision'.
Maybe I've had too much whiskey.
Maybe I'm too nostalgic.
But gosh-darnit, I am looking forward to the 'Lost/Star Trek' creative hybrid.
SS
Last edited:
Capt MarVell
Sr Member
Yet you read it anyway.
And yet you keep posting about it. :rolleyes I'm just here in the hope some actual new info will be released. You seem to be here to... complain? Hey, whatever floats your boat. :lol I'm keeping an open mind until after I see it on the big screen.
Jim
spcglider@aol.com
Sr Member
Man...I just CANNOT WAIT until STAR WARS goes under the knife and they "REBOOT" it so it will "have a broader appeal and draw a new audience".
Not just prequel. A whole new (though not so new because we don't have the creative guts to really start fresh) "re-imagining" of Star Wars.
Cuz, you know, those 1970's hairstyles really just don't hold up. And those effects (even the digital ones) are looking kinda "hokey". Time to "refresh" this thirty year old dust-farting monster and make it NEW! Redesign Artoo! Darth Vader is a bio-borg! Threepio is a female! (okay... not so much change on threepio... he's already kinda femmy). Han Solo becomes a GIRL!! Yeah..
In fact, I'm going to start a campaign... "Reboot Star Wars!"
Can't wait. Then we'll REALLY hear some *****in'.
spcglider@aol.com
Sr Member
Actually I think it is. The schizophrenic nature of the Bond franchise is not a fair comparison.
-G
