Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

[Jeyl]

Which Trek should they be faithful to? The original series? If so which season? The animated series? The incredibly dull first movie that was not very Trek like at all? The sitcom nonsense with the whales? The sloppy and ill conceived fifth movie? The first season of TNG or a latter season? The early Deep Space Nine or the latter Deep Space Nine? Voyager? Enterprise?

For me, I wouldn't take that direction. While I would no doubt be faithful to all the Star Trek's that have come before it (Will be hard for Enterprise), the direction of a new Star Trek wouldn't be restricted to what one series or movie did. I would create a Star Trek so that it could be it's own thing, and one idea that I've always had in mind when it comes to making a new series is usually met with "That would never work" and "Star Trek is about humanity!". Can you guess what my idea was? It's a pretty simple and we've seen it on some occasions in the show.

I also think being faithful to Star Trek as a whole should be pretty simple to. It doesn't have it be about just one thing. It can be about a lot of things. I think Star Trek is best when the writers come up with interesting ideas and just go for it. Whether they're outrageous or simple, Star Trek has the capacity to tell them without seeming to be un-Star Trek.

 

[nickytea]

Re: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

I cant really take anything Jeyl says seriously anymore.

Common sense would indicate any person who dislikes something would avoid it....But yet he's stated that he'll be going to see the movie , claiming that he "cant make a judgement without seeing the film"...??

Hes been making judgements about the film for the last 70 pages without having seen the film!!!

I figured it out: Jeyl is going to post whatever it is he feels like posting, regardless of the flow of the conversation or pertinence to the topic. See the above unfounded analogies and references to counterarguments never made.

I'm begining to wonder if he'd get the same satisfaction out of stringing all his posts together in an email to himself.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Looking forward to reading your script Jeyl.

 

[DARTH SABER]

Looking forward to reading your script Jeyl.

:lol :lol

 

[Zuiun]

Star Trek has at one point or another been everything; drama, comedy, action, deep, shallow, smart, stupid, sexy, exciting, bland, exceptional, terrible, and on and on. The basic principles that were there in the beginning are still there. The style and tone depend on who's doing the writing, producing, directing, and what the studios target audience is at the time.

This is probably the most relevant and spot on thing said about the notion of what Trek is, or what it's supposedly meant to be.

Star Trek has been around so long that it's tone has been ALL OVER the place. And that's ok, because that lends to its wide-spread appeal. Everyone can identify with it at whatever level appeals to them.

I know people who hold Voyage Home to be the epitome of what Trek should be about, while I find it mildly enjoyable fluff. Others look to the more cerebral episodes, and others latch on to the Khan style action.

With such a long history and so many different iterations, there is just NO SUCH THING as one characteristic to define what Trek is meant to be except...

...Entertainment.

 

[Jeyl]

Like it or not JJ's "this is for everyone, not just the fans" got more people into the theatre and has renewed peoples interest in the franchise.

If you're assuming that I believe Star Trek should be made for fans, you're wrong. Last time someone made a valentine's gift for the fans, it came in the form of the much lauded Enterprise final "These Are The Voyages". If you want to further commercialize Star Trek to reach new audiences, that's fine. I just prefer it if the elements that Star Trek took seriously over the span of it's 40 years of existence weren't simply tossed out for convenience sake. Transporters should not work that way and murdering defenseless people and leaving their civilization to die is not heroic. Also, I miss the old stardates.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

murdering defenseless people and leaving their civilization to die is not heroic.

Okay, it's been a while since I saw the last Trek film... But WHAT? I don't exactly recall that...

Also, I miss the old stardates.

Me too. But they don't really make a lick of difference to what Trek actually is so let it go.

 

[Jeyl]

Me too. But they don't really make a lick of difference to what Trek actually is so let it go.

I disagree. Star Trek takes place in the future, so it's not unreasonable to assume that they're using a date system that was developed to help better keep track of time in space. If you were to go back in time by 50 years, you think anyone would know what 'lol' meant, or anything related to the internet? Having characters say things like "Stardate 47988" and not knowing what it means helps sell the fact that it takes place in the future. They're using a system we haven't developed or encountered yet.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

I disagree. Star Trek takes place in the future, so it's not unreasonable to assume that they're using a date system that was developed to help better keep track of time in space. If you were to go back in time by 50 years, you think anyone would know what 'lol' meant, or anything related to the internet? Having characters say things like "Stardate 47988" and not knowing what it means helps sell the fact that it takes place in the future. They're using a system we haven't developed or encountered yet.

How is that relative to the stories they are telling? Trek is about exploration and adventure in space (however that's told). How they state a specific point in time doesn't matter at all to the story telling as long as it's consistant within itself. JJ Trek is a reboot, it doesn't need to be relative to anything in old Trek. As far as the altered timeline is concerned there may never be an Enterprise D or a Deep Space 9 or a Voyager. At the very least the actions of this alternate crew would ensure that the players would be different.

 

[greatwazoo42]

I cant really take anything Jeyl says seriously anymore.

Wait a minute! You mean you did at some point?

Someone call Ripley's! We got one!!!

 

[Jeyl]

How is that relative to the stories they are telling? Trek is about exploration and adventure in space (however that's told). How they state a specific point in time doesn't matter at all to the story telling as long as it's consistant within itself.

Because the Captain's log that begins with the star date that that no one understands is one of those iconic things that sets Star Trek apart from everything else. There are a lot of elements in a lot of different movies, tv shows and comics that aren't relative to the story, but they still help give the product it's own unique identity. Would it make a difference if the blasters in Star Wars shot bullets instead of beams, or if Lightsabers were metal swords instead of beams of light? You could easily replace the lightsaber with a regular sword and you wouldn't need to change all that much, especially in the original trilogy.

 

[Bryancd]

^ I'm curious, when you type that, does it actually make sense in your head?

 

[Jeyl]

^ I'm curious, when you type that, does it actually make sense in your head?

Stardate 47988? It's the only stardate I remember from the episode "All Good Things", but I can't make heads or tails on what the real date actually was.

 

[Mola Rob]

It's like shooting Nerf darts at the Great Wall of China...

 

[Jeyl]

It's like shooting Nerf darts at the Great Wall of China...

And yet you still do it anyway. I'm honored to be worthy of such attention even though I'm just a viewer who's opinion is different than yours and not a recognized landmark.

 

[Mola Rob]

If only it was simple as a difference of opinion. :facepalm

 

[Jet Beetle]

I'm not dismissing anything (jeeze, a straw man in every post!). I'm merely saying that the changes JJ made, although to a classic Trek fan they may seem to compromise the brand, made the film successful.

Like it or not JJ's "this is for everyone, not just the fans" got more people into the theatre and has renewed peoples interest in the franchise.

But Michael - let's not forget JJ Trek did not do as well as Paramount thought it would. The success of the film rests on the marketing - no Trek film, not even the motion picture got as much attention as mac store Trek. Shoot, Gene's death didn't get as much ink.

 

[Jet Beetle]

I disagree. Star Trek takes place in the future, so it's not unreasonable to assume that they're using a date system that was developed to help better keep track of time in space. If you were to go back in time by 50 years, you think anyone would know what 'lol' meant, or anything related to the internet? Having characters say things like "Stardate 47988" and not knowing what it means helps sell the fact that it takes place in the future. They're using a system we haven't developed or encountered yet.

I actually like it when movies or shows do this. THX 1138 had those guys watching some sort of game where it sounded like lions were being tossed around = but all we saw was the faces of the crowd - George Lucas said "If you were from their time, you'd understand what was going on." I thought that was bitchin.

 

[SSgt Burton]

Kevin

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Kevin

lollol