NationStates Jolt Archive

Poll incoming

Lost in space was shit :p

I'm feeling optimistic.

I just hope I can overcome the weird of seeing Eomer as McCoy.

Theres a new Trek movie coming?

Theres a new Trek movie coming?

Hellz yeah!

Official Website with teaser (http://www.startrekmovie.com/)

Lost in space was shit :p

You're a bastard for stirring memories of it. How do you live with yourself?

The upcoming Star Trek Movie is going to...

suck.


I truely believe so.

that way, if I'm wrong, then I will be happy.

If I'm right... well...

I've never seen any TV show or film about Star Trek, ever...but this film looked interesting, I think it'll be an okay film.

Official Website with teaser (http://www.startrekmovie.com/)

May 2009?!

won't we all be dead by then?

May 2009?!

won't we all be dead by then?

What's annoying is the reason for the later release date. Originally they were going to release it for Christmas but they don't want to compete with the new X-Men movie and they figure more people will go see it when the weather is nicer...

Bastitches.

Oh well, maybe I can con somebody into taking me to see it for my birthday...

They pushed it back?

Last I checked that site 2 weeks ago it said "Christmas 2008" and now it says "May 2009".









I WANT MY TREK NOW!!!!!

Reasons for hope:

I'm easy to please
Zachary Quinto plays Spock

So I'm not going to jump on the "It will suck" bandwagon until it comes out.

I really hope it's good, as I will definitely be seeing it with my boyfriend.

What's annoying is the reason for the later release date. Originally they were going to release it for Christmas but they don't want to compete with the new X-Men movie and they figure more people will go see it when the weather is nicer...

I keep thinking 'thats a stupid reason' but then I remember that I live in an area that doesn't have a snow plow within 400 miles.

Fall/early winter and late spring/early to mid-summer are the big movie release times. Late winter/early spring is when you clear the shelves (too late for Oscar consideration, too early for popcorn movies) w/a lot of generic romantic comedies and Late Summer to early Fall is usually non-competitive action films, horror movies, and sometimes some independents that picked up distribution from festivals earlier in the year. If they get shoved out of fall/early winter they go to the next big period.

...but they don't want to compete with the new X-Men movie...
New X-Men movie?

Hopefully that won't suck as badly as the last one.

New X-Men movie?

Hopefully that won't suck as badly as the last one.

Sounds like a prequel. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men_Origins:_Wolverine)

What's annoying is the reason for the later release date. Originally they were going to release it for Christmas but they don't want to compete with the new X-Men movie and they figure more people will go see it when the weather is nicer...

Bastitches.

Oh well, maybe I can con somebody into taking me to see it for my birthday...

Wait, that doesn't match up-X-Men Origins: Wolverine (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458525/) is listed as coming out in May of 2009 as well...

its star trek so im not expecting great things from it.

but im optimistic.

Its star trek, of course it'll suck. :D

What's annoying is the reason for the later release date. Originally they were going to release it for Christmas but they don't want to compete with the new X-Men movie and they figure more people will go see it when the weather is nicer...

Bastitches.

Oh well, maybe I can con somebody into taking me to see it for my birthday...
The reason I heard for pushing it back is that the WGA strike meant that there are very few blockbuster scripts available for summer 2009. Paramount apparently thinks this will be their big draw film of the summer since there are few available then.

be good (Cautiously optimistic here). It looks like they are taking great pains with it and trying for a labor of love, instead of just ramming it out. The storyline sounds interesting too so...

Ok, so its an old school storyline one instead of The Next Generation.


It will be weird seeing Kirk played by someone who isnt the Shat-man.

The franchise doesn't need saving.

Poll incoming

I voted for every option, just because I could. :D

Honestly though, I'm cautiously optimistic about this one.

I haven't really heard about it yet. Wiki link?
______
By the way I was banned for a little while yesterday becuase I forgot to log in after 28 days but the mods brought it back. Thanks mods!

the Shat-man.

Ok, that just looks and sounds WRONG.

Patrick Stewart would be the only saving grace of any such film, primarily because he's an awesome actor, but for some reason repeatedly does awful films. Perhaps its so that everyone remembers what a good stage actor he is...

By definition, a Star Trek movie will always suck horribly.

Patrick Stewart would be the only saving grace of any such film, primarily because he's an awesome actor, but for some reason repeatedly does awful films. Perhaps its so that everyone remembers what a good stage actor he is...

No, it's because they pay him lots of money. I would star in any number of bad films, so long as they were paying me...

By definition, a Star Trek movie will always suck horribly.

Ever seen Wrath of Khan? ;)

I'm cautiously optimistic. There's been a lot of good Trek and a lot of really bad Trek. I'll always hope for a good movie, of course, but I won't let myself be crushed if we get another Nemesis or Insurrection dumped on us.

Star Trek is already long dead. It went through its prime and golden years in TNG, was on life support for DS9, gave its death throes during Voyager, and was made a zombie for Enterprise.

Star Trek is already long dead. It went through its prime and golden years in TNG, was on life support for DS9, gave its death throes during Voyager, and was made a zombie for Enterprise.

Pretty much.

I've said it in other threads, but I'll say it again.

Paramount decided they were tired of money, so they released Enterprise, a series which went backwards in time and destroyed continuity...rather than jumping a century or two after Voyager and expanding the Trek Universe even further.

Now they decided to go backwards...again. The result will be similar. This movie will likely put the franchise into mothballs. Interest among younger fans for the TOS timeframe is quite low, and many original fans will likely not see it due to the new cast.

As a result, Star Trek will spend ten years on the shelf (as it did between the end of TOS and the first feature film), and when some new blood comes to Paramount, specifically writers and producers, we will hopefully get the Trek series that we should have gotten seven years ago.

Star Trek is already long dead. It went through its awkward teenage years on TNG, was in it's prime for DS9, went on life support during Voyager, and died a quiet death with Enterprise.

Fixed

I have heard rumors that this new Star Trek movie will be a complete series reboot for Star Trek the same way the latest Batman movie was a complete reboot.

I've said it in other threads, but I'll say it again.

Paramount decided they were tired of money, so they released Enterprise, a series which went backwards in time and destroyed continuity...rather than jumping a century or two after Voyager and expanding the Trek Universe even further.

I really have to take objection to this. I don't think that the time period matters nearly as much as the writers and the care taken by everyone involved in the production. Enterprise's season four, while not up there with the best Trek ever made, was at its worst watchable and at its best exceedingly good. I particularly enjoyed the Daedalus episode arc, which stepped away from the OMG SPACE OPERA! trend of recent Trek productions and invested much more into the ethical questions and dilemmas which marks the best science fiction. Since we don't (to the best of my knowledge) even know the plot yet, I think it's premature to bemoan the film simply based on its time period.

Furthermore, the generally-agreed-upon most popular and critically acclaimed Trek film, the aforementioned Wrath of Khan, was based in the TOS era, as were the Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country. Meanwhile, Nemesis -- a film that expanded Trek into the 'future's future' -- was a miserable flop from just about every angle.

EDIT: And, when Undiscovered Country came out (1991), we'd already had several seasons of TNG, meaning that it was in effect going backwards in time.

Now, I'm not saying that this movie will be another Wrath of Khan -- in fact, I think it won't -- but judging based on a cast list, a time period, and a ten-second pre-trailer seems a little hasty.

Star Trek movies have sucked big time after the original cast refused to do any more of them.

Live long and prosper. \\//,

I have heard rumors that this new Star Trek movie will be a complete series reboot for Star Trek the same way the latest Batman movie was a complete reboot.

Honestly they should of just marketed Enterprise as a reboot, instead of a prequel. The canon violations wouldn't be so jarring then. Ought of gotten a writer or two too.

Star Trek movies have sucked big time after the original cast refused to do any more of them.

Live long and prosper. \\//,

First Contact was excellent.

I'm just bummed that the dude from Heroes is playing Spock. Heroes is the worst TV show I've seen in years, like B-movie level of bad, and I don't think I'll be able to take any actor from that show seriously ever again. Star Trek already requires a lot of suspension of disbelief, but now it's also going to require that I somehow suppress the laughter that will bubble up every time the Heroes villain suggests that somebody be more logical.

Wait, that doesn't match up-X-Men Origins: Wolverine (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458525/) is listed as coming out in May of 2009 as well...

Maybe those guys changed as well. With all the migrations this Christmas is looking bleak for new movies.

I haven't really heard about it yet. Wiki link?


there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29)

I have heard rumors that this new Star Trek movie will be a complete series reboot for Star Trek the same way the latest Batman movie was a complete reboot.

I don't think they're rebooting per se, since they seem to have a panel of "trekkies" to check continuity, but at the same time just from watching the teaser it doesn't look like the look and feel is going to be made to slavishly match up with TOS. (There are already subtle visual differences in the Enterprise that won't match the model from TOS, but I'm okay with that.)

I'm just bummed that the dude from Heroes is playing Spock. Heroes is the worst TV show I've seen in years, like B-movie level of bad, and I don't think I'll be able to take any actor from that show seriously ever again. Star Trek already requires a lot of suspension of disbelief, but now it's also going to require that I somehow suppress the laughter that will bubble up every time the Heroes villain suggests that somebody be more logical.

Kind of an ironic problem for Trek. Most times it's the other way around, an actor gets tagged with the Trek character and can't break away from it.

But what's the story? I saw it involves Romulans.

But what's the story? I saw it involves Romulans.
I wish they'd do a whole movie explaining why the Klingons went from being bratty dark-skinned humans with heavy eyebrows in the original series, to being the wrinkle-headed armored badasses in Next Gen.

Like they showed in Enterprise?:p
Oh, did they explain it in that series? I never watched Enterprise (I gave up on Trek shows during the first season of Voyager) so I'm probably way behind the times.

I wish they'd do a whole movie explaining why the Klingons went from being bratty dark-skinned humans with heavy eyebrows in the original series, to being the wrinkle-headed armored badasses in Next Gen.Like they showed in Enterprise?:p

Oh, did they explain it in that series? I never watched Enterprise (I gave up on Trek shows during the first season of Voyager) so I'm probably way behind the times.Enterprise was fun.:)

Is there a site or a Wiki you could link to that gives the explanation of Klingon evolution in a summary? If I'm going to watch Enterprise, it's going to be via the DVD sets, and I don't want to wait that long for the explanation (by "wait", I mean "Netflix").
I actually just went to Wikipedia and looked up "Klingon." They have a section about the explanation from the Enterprise episodes, though I don't know how accurate or comprehensive it is.

Like they showed in Enterprise?:p

Is there a site or a Wiki you could link to that gives the explanation of Klingon evolution in a summary? If I'm going to watch Enterprise, it's going to be via the DVD sets, and I don't want to wait that long for the explanation (by "wait", I mean "Netflix").

Is there a site or a Wiki you could link to that gives the explanation of Klingon evolution in a summary? If I'm going to watch Enterprise, it's going to be via the DVD sets, and I don't want to wait that long for the explanation (by "wait", I mean "Netflix").

Try wikipedia under Klingons

Or, you could check at Memory Alpha, the dedicated Star Trek Wiki:D. And, yeah, they do explain the Klingon's discrepancy in detail (at least how it works out it Trek time, I was happy just admitting that an old, low budget show didn't have the money or technology to do it all right).


Linky: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Portal:Main

I'm a little disappointed that william shatner will not be in the film


And I'm also disappointed that the NGS crew are not being documented in the film, but it's like a retroactive film that takes us back in time

I dunno, I'm a huge star trek fan, but i'm not sure about where the films are going these days.............

... but i'm not sure about where the films are going these days.............

but the real question is are they going boldly?

but the real question is are they going boldly?


hahahahaha, well, whether it's boldly successful or boldly unsuccessful, is anyone's guess :p

New X-Men movie?

Hopefully that won't suck as badly as the last one.

I will not see it unless they have Gambit in it.

Or, you could check at Memory Alpha, the dedicated Star Trek Wiki:D. And, yeah, they do explain the Klingon's discrepancy in detail (at least how it works out it Trek time, I was happy just admitting that an old, low budget show didn't have the money or technology to do it all right).


Linky: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Portal:Main

Although the DS9 episode where the crew went back to the TOS setting for the Trouble With Tribbles episode was cute when the Starfleet guys dind't recognize the Klingons for what they were, and Worf got all embarassed when they asked about it...

A short time in the future, in a movie theater not so very far away....

er, wrong "Star":

These are the voyages of the New Star Trek Movie; its mission, to seek out new audiences, to boldly go where no movie has ever gone before. And I know there's a clause I forgot.

I didn't know there was going to be a new trek movie, but I doubt it'll be much good. Could be surprised though.

I wish they'd do a whole movie explaining why the Klingons went from being bratty dark-skinned humans with heavy eyebrows in the original series, to being the wrinkle-headed armored badasses in Next Gen. that would be interesing. but will they do one where Romulans and Vulcans suddenly get the 'Herman Munster' makeover?

Although the DS9 episode where the crew went back to the TOS setting for the Trouble With Tribbles episode was cute when the Starfleet guys dind't recognize the Klingons for what they were, and Worf got all embarassed when they asked about it..."We don't talk about them..."

I will not see it unless they have Gambit in it.
he's in it. (http://imdb.com/title/tt0458525/)


I don't think they're rebooting per se, since they seem to have a panel of "trekkies" to check continuity, but at the same time just from watching the teaser it doesn't look like the look and feel is going to be made to slavishly match up with TOS. (There are already subtle visual differences in the Enterprise that won't match the model from TOS, but I'm okay with that.)
What Continuity? First Contact destroyed that. 'Enterprise' buried any continuity that was left...

Cannon is decided on a yearly basis and on an episodial basis also...

there is no 'Continuity' for Star Trek.

What Continuity? First Contact destroyed that. 'Enterprise' buried any continuity that was left...

Cannon is decided on a yearly basis and on an episodial basis also...

there is no 'Continuity' for Star Trek.

That's just a side effect of having everybody and their dog writing episodes and movies for the franchise. There are certain continuity items that one just has to say "ah screw it" that are unavoidable in a case like this. I mean, TOS had dozens of little ones just because the show was still 'growing up' as it were, like 'Vulcanian' becoming 'Vulcan' or 'Space Central' evolving into 'Starfleet.'

I agree that Enterprise got careless when it came to continuity, but then, one could also argue that history isn't ever 100% accurate anyway, and what Kirk's crew or Picard's crew THINK happened back in the 22nd Century might be quite different from what actually did.

I will not see it unless they have Gambit in it.
Looks like us Ragin’ Cajun fans are in for a treat: Gambit’s slated to be in the film.

Seems it may very well be a mix of the old Chris Claremont and Frank Miller miniseries and the Barry Windsor Smith Weapon X run.

I agree that Enterprise got careless when it came to continuity, but then, one could also argue that history isn’t ever 100% accurate anyway, and what Kirk’s crew or Picard’s crew THINK happened back in the 22nd Century might be quite different from what actually did.
If Star Wars can retrofit their universe to hell and back, I don’t see why Star Trek can’t. :p

he's in it. (http://imdb.com/title/tt0458525/)

Excellent. The guy looks like the perfect twit to play him, too. Still, he will probably be some Weapon-X project; unfortunate.

Excellent. The guy looks like the perfect twit to play him, too. Still, he will probably be some Weapon-X project; unfortunate.
Probably.

There’s also a ‘Young Logan’ marked down, so maybe we’ll see some of the stuff from the excellent Origin run; Logan being born, growing up and going ‘snik’ for the first time in 19th century Canada.

If Star Wars can retrofit their universe to hell and back, I don’t see why Star Trek can’t. :p

The thing that sort of sets Star Trek apart from a lot of other sci fi series is that there's usually not one big long term story arc written by a single individual.

Shows like Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica (the new one) and the Star Wars movies were all generally written by one or very few individuals meant to tell an epic story that spans the course of the run of the series. Internal continuity tends to be very good with only a few minor continuity glitches.

Star Trek is really more a setting than a story. With a few exceptions like late DS9 or Star Trek:II - IV there isn't usually a unifying story arc. It's a vehicle for just sci fi stories in general and the writers 'borrow' the characters and setting to tell their story. Kinda like shows like The Outer Limits or Amazing Stories where the series is just a bunch of stories. The only difference in ST is that the characters and setting are always the same.

That's Star Trek's strength: flexibility. If you need continuity then go elsewhere. Babylon 5 or new BSG is more for you. While shows like those do have independent stories and can explore contemporary social and political issues, it tends to be non-arc and usually seems almost shoehorned in. With Star Trek you can tell any story you want that can be adapted to the available characters, so flexibility is gained at the expense of perfect continuity.

And I'm okay with that.

oh hell no :(

That's just a side effect of having everybody and their dog writing episodes and movies for the franchise. except the problem is that the Roddenberry estate is constantly changing their minds. first the cartoon isn't cannon, now it is. the TOS is cannon unless a movie/later series contradicts it... this isn't the writers, its the estate.
There are certain continuity items that one just has to say "ah screw it" that are unavoidable in a case like this. I mean, TOS had dozens of little ones just because the show was still 'growing up' as it were, like 'Vulcanian' becoming 'Vulcan' or 'Space Central' evolving into 'Starfleet.' and those are minor considering Cochran was supposed to be travelling from Alpha Centari to earth with his first warp drive when first contact was established, Vulcans are supposed to have Green blood, no one is supposed to have seen a Romulan until well into the TOS series...

I agree that Enterprise got careless when it came to continuity, but then, one could also argue that history isn't ever 100% accurate anyway, and what Kirk's crew or Picard's crew THINK happened back in the 22nd Century might be quite different from what actually did. except record keeping back then is supposed to be better than now. Think about how well documented our present is and move foreward...

Probably.

There’s also a ‘Young Logan’ marked down, so maybe we’ll see some of the stuff from the excellent Origin run; Logan being born, growing up and going ‘snik’ for the first time in 19th century Canada.

That would make a fine T.V. series.

except the problem is that the Roddenberry estate is constantly changing their minds. first the cartoon isn't cannon, now it is. the TOS is cannon unless a movie/later series contradicts it... this isn't the writers, its the estate.

Which, to me, is a symptom of the 'too many chefs' problem.


and those are minor considering Cochran was supposed to be travelling from Alpha Centari to earth with his first warp drive when first contact was established, Vulcans are supposed to have Green blood, no one is supposed to have seen a Romulan until well into the TOS series...

Those things are annoying but again, it's an 'ah screw it' thing. Klingon blood changes color too and for stupid reasons but Star Trek is what it is. A setting for storytelling. It's just not an epic saga where internal consistency is much more critical.


except record keeping back then is supposed to be better than now. Think about how well documented our present is and move foreward...

Meh. I wouldn't put too much stock in it even now.

Those things are annoying but again, it's an 'ah screw it' thing. Klingon blood changes color too and for stupid reasons but Star Trek is what it is. A setting for storytelling. It's just not an epic saga where internal consistency is much more critical.
and all my points are setting problems.

history is vital to any setting.

ok, I can see TNG adding in the Eugenics Wars. TOS touched on the possiblity with Kahn.

but to remove our first colony on Alpha Centari?
Changing biology of alien races?

to me, the problems with TNG and it's ilk are multiple.
1) instantanious communication. too many times you had Picard or some other captain calling starfleet for advice.
2) Replicators: no supply problems.
3) Holotechnology: when virtual dating becomes easier than real dating...

all this is with the setting.

I've always felt that Enterprise should've gone forwards. take the theme from Andromeda and use that. one Federation Starship is stuck in a singularity and is pulled out centuries later to find the Federation crumbled and it's now working to reestablish the federation. that would've rocked since you can re-explore the various races that made up the Federation.

That would make a fine T.V. series.
Possibly...

It’s such a good run of comics that I wouldn’t want to curse it by putting it on the screen.

Probably.

There’s also a ‘Young Logan’ marked down, so maybe we’ll see some of the stuff from the excellent Origin run; Logan being born, growing up and going ‘snik’ for the first time in 19th century Canada.

Oh Deadpool's in it. Wonder if he'll act like his comic book counterpart.

to me, the problems with TNG and it's ilk are multiple.
1) instantanious communication. too many times you had Picard or some other captain calling starfleet for advice.
2) Replicators: no supply problems.
3) Holotechnology: when virtual dating becomes easier than real dating...


I agree with all this. This, IMHO, is one of the major contributing factors to the 'particle of the week' solution where everything is so easy and automatically taken care of that the only time a story can be told is if the equipment malfunctions or theyface something they've never seen before and the only way to deal with it is to hit it with some new particle or wave.

Think about the holodeck: if any piece of equipment in real life malfunctioned that often and in such a way as to cause a danger to the ship, they'd yank the sucker right out during the next visit to a starbase.

But that gets us back to the setting for a story thing. With Star Trek, you almost have to take each individual episode and evaluate it in a vaccum as if no other episodes exist (except for ones that are meant to reference each other, obviously).

I know you want the setting and events to be internally consistent... But that's because you want an epic where everything works together. Star Trek just isn't that. It never has been, never will be. The closest it ever came was with the long term arcs of the Klingon and Dominion wars in DS9 but even those you have to sort of take as individual entities within th ewhole.


I've always felt that Enterprise should've gone forwards. take the theme from Andromeda and use that. one Federation Starship is stuck in a singularity and is pulled out centuries later to find the Federation crumbled and it's now working to reestablish the federation. that would've rocked since you can re-explore the various races that made up the Federation.

I agree that would have been made of awesome. I think the problem is that Gene Roddenberry's ghost still haunts the minds of the writers and the existence of the Federation itself is sacrosanct. Roddenberry's vision of the Trek future was one of hope and optimism, and the demise of the Federation would run directly counter to that.

But yanno... Roddenberry had a great idea when he created Star Trek but he wasn't much of a storyteller as far as it goes. I think maybe it's time to let him rest and bring Trek up to the new standard for Sci Fi.

Ok, that just looks and sounds WRONG.

I don't know, it seemed right on the money to me :D

I will not see it unless they have Gambit in it.

They have Ryan Reynolds listed as playing Remy Lebeau, so you're in luck.

I do have one really big Trek complaint...

How in the HELL did Janeway make Admiral before Picard?!?!?!?!?:mad:

I do have one really big Trek complaint...

How in the HELL did Janeway make Admiral before Picard?!?!?!?!?:mad:
Picard was too much of a maverick.

Picard was too much of a maverick.

That didn't hold Kirk back, and he was WAY more Maverick than picard could ever dream of being.

I do have one really big Trek complaint...

How in the HELL did Janeway make Admiral before Picard?!?!?!?!?:mad:

Figured she couldn't lose a fucking desk.

I do have one really big Trek complaint...

How in the HELL did Janeway make Admiral before Picard?!?!?!?!?:mad:

Because he doesn't want it.

Picard likes flying his ship. Janeway spent 7 years doing nothing but.

Picard has no family to speak of except for a strained relationship with his brother. Janeway has a fiance and, presumably, got married.

Picard could have had command any time he wanted, especially after the events of "Generations" and the loss of Enterprise-D. He has no interest in desk work, if he did, he would have left Star Fleet after the Locutus saga and gone to build atlantis.

Because he doesn't want it.

Picard likes flying his ship. Janeway spent 7 years doing nothing but.

Picard has no family to speak of except for a strained relationship with his brother. Janeway has a fiance and, presumably, got married.

Picard could have had command any time he wanted, especially after the events of "Generations" and the loss of Enterprise-D. He has no interest in desk work, if he did, he would have left Star Fleet after the Locutus saga and gone to build atlantis.

Indeed, if my memory serves he was offered command a few times, in the same way Riccard was offered command of his own ship a few times but was too attatched to the crew.


ps- I want Romulans in this movie. Nothing makes Star Treck cool like Warbirds.

That didn't hold Kirk back, and he was WAY more Maverick than picard could ever dream of being.

ah, but Kirk was 'demoted' back down to captain after ST III and ST IV.

Picard a Maveric? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

But yanno... Roddenberry had a great idea when he created Star Trek but he wasn't much of a storyteller as far as it goes. I think maybe it's time to let him rest and bring Trek up to the new standard for Sci Fi.

Roddenberry's univers had no Klingons, no Romulans, no money, no conflict. it was literally a paradise.

the Network insisted on the Klingons and Romulans because they wanted some sort of 'enemy race'.

Roddenberry's univers had no Klingons, no Romulans, no money, no conflict. it was literally a paradise.

the Network insisted on the Klingons and Romulans because they wanted some sort of 'enemy race'.

Happily ever after is a fine ending to a story, but it makes for shitty viewing.

Figured she couldn't lose a fucking desk.

You rock.

Because he doesn't want it.

Picard likes flying his ship. Janeway spent 7 years doing nothing but.

Picard has no family to speak of except for a strained relationship with his brother. Janeway has a fiance and, presumably, got married.

Picard could have had command any time he wanted, especially after the events of "Generations" and the loss of Enterprise-D. He has no interest in desk work, if he did, he would have left Star Fleet after the Locutus saga and gone to build atlantis.

Moreso I guess because Picard's brother got killed in the fire (Generations) and didn't Janeway's fiancee marry somebody else after she went missing?

Roddenberry's univers had no Klingons, no Romulans, no money, no conflict. it was literally a paradise.

the Network insisted on the Klingons and Romulans because they wanted some sort of 'enemy race'.

Which just goes to show not every decision made by the networks is stupid.

ah, but Kirk was 'demoted' back down to captain after ST III and ST IV.

Picard a Maveric? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Meh they only demoted him because it's what he wanted and his actions gave them an excuse to do it.

I don't know how much I like the idea of "replacing" the original characters with other actors, and I feel the movies should have given the Deep Space Nine people a chance to strut their stuff (since the movies seemed to move forward using the next series), but Simon Pegg is going to be in the new movie so it can't be that bad...I hope.

But that gets us back to the setting for a story thing. With Star Trek, you almost have to take each individual episode and evaluate it in a vaccum as if no other episodes exist (except for ones that are meant to reference each other, obviously).

I know you want the setting and events to be internally consistent... But that's because you want an epic where everything works together. Star Trek just isn't that. It never has been, never will be. The closest it ever came was with the long term arcs of the Klingon and Dominion wars in DS9 but even those you have to sort of take as individual entities within th ewhole.

I agree that the Star Trek episodes were always meant to "stand alone", but the continuity issues are a bit bigger than you might think. You're basically "changing history" and while little details might not mean much in the interim, they add up in the long term. You can't, say, have a story about Picard's sister if a previous episode established that he never had one, or that a Romulan attack on a Cardassian ship was to get back for a battle that never actually took place. Now, I don't know enough about Enterprise to say just how bad the continuity issues were (never got that into it) but from what I can gather online (and from my parents, who are much more "Trekkie" than I am) the issue does seem to exist- especially bad for a series with the "story structure" that Star Trek has.

ps- I want Romulans in this movie. Nothing makes Star Treck cool like Warbirds.There were a few Romulans in the last one.

F**k, that teaser video is frightening. The occupational, health and safety standards for those workers are appalling. No safety harnesses or barriers. F**k, one slip and those blokes are like, gone.

If the Enterprise were being built here in Oz, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union would be closing down the entire operation.

If the Enterprise were being built here in Oz, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union would be closing down the entire operation.

having a big "made in China" sticker on the ship would be fun

F**k, that teaser video is frightening. The occupational, health and safety standards for those workers are appalling. No safety harnesses or barriers. F**k, one slip and those blokes are like, gone.

If the Enterprise were being built here in Oz, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union would be closing down the entire operation.

That scene will never appear in the movie. This teaser trailer is just to get people excited, nothing more.

Leonard Nimoy is Spock. I don't want any other actor pretending to be Spock. So I haven't watched the Enterprise series, but I made a fellow Trek-fan watch it and he was horrified and appalled (and we had to watch 2nd TOS season in a marathon sitting for him to get rid of the horror).

Or, like the Lolcat puts it: http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/funny-pictures-scared-cat-naked-guy.jpg

having a big "made in China" sticker on the ship would be fun

so that's what the story will be about... them trying to figure out why the crew is succumbing to lead poisioning!

:D
:)
Very Excited. I was just sent the link and as a fan since the original , I am looking forward to the movie. I loved Trek with Picard. But seeing as this is how it all begins I won't see that bunch of actors. I do not think this movie will hurt the trek series. The ability of special effects of todays technology will supersede any previous Trek movie.

That didn't hold Kirk back, and he was WAY more Maverick than picard could ever dream of being.
But Starfleet wasn't yet the bureaucratic nightmare it later became. Kirk rose to Admiral in a time of war (against the Klingons).

Honestly they should of just marketed Enterprise as a reboot, instead of a prequel. The canon violations wouldn't be so jarring then.
Remember Captain Pike? He seems to have been erased from the history.

Or, you could check at Memory Alpha, the dedicated Star Trek Wiki:D. And, yeah, they do explain the Klingon's discrepancy in detail (at least how it works out it Trek time, I was happy just admitting that an old, low budget show didn't have the money or technology to do it all right).


Linky: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Portal:Main

"Yes they are klingons."

"What happened Worf?"

"We don't discuss it with outsiders."

I agree that the Star Trek episodes were always meant to "stand alone", but the continuity issues are a bit bigger than you might think. You're basically "changing history" and while little details might not mean much in the interim, they add up in the long term. You can't, say, have a story about Picard's sister if a previous episode established that he never had one, or that a Romulan attack on a Cardassian ship was to get back for a battle that never actually took place. Now, I don't know enough about Enterprise to say just how bad the continuity issues were (never got that into it) but from what I can gather online (and from my parents, who are much more "Trekkie" than I am) the issue does seem to exist- especially bad for a series with the "story structure" that Star Trek has.

I understand what you're saying. It's just a natural side effect of having a swarm of different writers working on scipts. It's still not a huge problem, IMHO if you take Trek for what it is. Whether Picard ever was said to have a sister or not doesn't really hurt the story that you're watching at that time. You just sort of have to take it in stride and evaluate the episode on its own merits.

An Epic can't get away with that because it builds on its own story. An element like whether the Captain had any siblings must remain consistent because the story isn't encapsulated in one episode, it runs the entire series, generally. (For example, the new Battlestar Galactica can't turn around now and pretend that Lee Adama has always had a sister because they've clearly indicated he does not AND the absence of other siblings for Lee ever since his brother's death is a plot element that has been touched upon repeatedly as the series explores the complex relationship between Lee and his father.)

I don't think the continuity problems with Enterprise were all that bad, honestly. Phase pistols being introduced even though Pike's Enterprise still used lasers is the only glaring one I can recall off the top of my head.

Remember Captain Pike? He seems to have been erased from the history.
Captain Pike has been cast for the new film. Apparently he'll be in it.

Poll incoming

It's going to suck, but not necessarily through any fault of its own. Its suckiness was preordained when the last movie killed off Data. The best it can hope for is to pull some stupid "It Was All A Dream," BS which will make this movie suck, but saves the chance for the next one not to suck.

Captain Pike has been cast for the new film. Apparently he'll be in it.
All righty then!

My favorite Trek continuity error was within an episode, the "Lazarus" episode where the guy has a double from a parallel universe and they keep swapping places (but if ever the two of them meet up in the same universe, both universes will be destroyed!!! yeah, right). Lazarus has just been left to wander alone around the Enterprise and nearly destroy the ship, so Captain Kirk says portentuously that we won't leave him unattended again-- and walks away. Cut to commercial, and when we return, the order to guard Lazarus has been forgotten about, and he's left wandering alone around the Enterprise, still, to nearly destroy the ship, again.

Wow, an impressive amount of Trek hate going on in here... it almost puts Trekkies to shame (and believe me when I say, Trekkies hate Star Trek more than most "normal" people do). I'm excited for this. I think it'll be a good movie, and agree with most of their casting choices. Personally, I say, make a good movie first, and if continuity fits in somewhere, then it's an added perk.

As for Enterprise, I didn't think the continuity and canon were all that bad. Okay, so they met the Borg and Ferengi once. I thought they explained that away fairly well.

All righty then!

My favorite Trek continuity error was within an episode, the "Lazarus" episode where the guy has a double from a parallel universe and they keep swapping places (but if ever the two of them meet up in the same universe, both universes will be destroyed!!! yeah, right). Lazarus has just been left to wander alone around the Enterprise and nearly destroy the ship, so Captain Kirk says portentuously that we won't leave him unattended again-- and walks away. Cut to commercial, and when we return, the order to guard Lazarus has been forgotten about, and he's left wandering alone around the Enterprise, still, to nearly destroy the ship, again.

Clearly he was the other Lazarus.

Clearly he was the other Lazarus.
Must have been the other Captain Kirk, too (the one from the "bearded Spock" episode). Yeah, that's it, the good Captain Kirk ordered guards, but during commercial break the evil Captain Kirk rescinded the order!