Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Dear God in heaven. Do they have to do another time travel story??? Are they that hard up for ideas in the actual Trek contiunity that they have to travel back in time and screw it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potsherds Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Dear God in heaven. Do they have to do another time travel story??? Are they that hard up for ideas in the actual Trek contiunity that they have to travel back in time and screw it up? Job security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koudoulis Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Something can't be bumped simply for being awesome in and of itself, Wert? In any case...watched a bunch of Enterprise yesterday during a marathon on Sci-Fi. I was wondering if JJ was going to throw any references to Archer and his crew into the movie to tie things in more...? i know many people who wouldnt be very pleased at that prospect i on the other hand wouldnt mind if they brought Tpol's great grand daughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 i know many people who wouldnt be very pleased at that prospect i on the other hand wouldnt mind if they brought Tpol's great grand daughter Yah. I can't understand that. But I know a lot of people who need to get over it. It's canon and it needed to be given time to finish sorting itself out before getting axed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sad King Billy Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Dear God in heaven. Do they have to do another time travel story??? Are they that hard up for ideas in the actual Trek contiunity that they have to travel back in time and screw it up? I'm not a trek fan, but isn't this a marvelous opportunity to move the setting away from the "idealistic" end of the Sliding Scale Of Idealism Versus Realism and more towards the "realistic" (=darker) end? Maybe not, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 SKB, The aftermath of the Dominion War should move the Federation to a very dark place. They just don't want to go their for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 There was a brief, Easter Egg-like cameo in Nemesis. In one scene, the crew is discussing a group of ships being assembled to intercept the Romulan Scimitar ship, and one of the ships on the screen is the U.S.S. Archer. Though it is probably likely that some mention will be made here, if anywhere. Before Kirk, I bet Archer and his Enterprise were the first real big-time legendary crew of Starfleet. This I recall. Would like to see how JJ will address it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derfel Cadarn Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 SKB, The aftermath of the Dominion War should move the Federation to a very dark place. They just don't want to go their for some reason. I agree. The next Trek series should be set about 50 years in the future (long enough that they can still do stuff like novels with the existing crews, and also to give them time to be old and thus not have to have too many cameos). Maybe 20 years. How I'd do it: The beginning opens up with the Federation fleet in battle with a Borg fleet. It's pretty familiar stuff, Starfleet are similar as to now, focusing on the bridge of one ship with an admiral and a youngish commander. The battle really heats up, and we see ships blowing up left and right possibly including the Enterprise-E. It fast forwards 5 years or so. It's in a dingy bar and some really ragged looking people congregate in a dingy basement with some computers and monitors, and the general talk seems to be how one of their last major fleet has been routed. The commander says something like like "welcome to Starfleet command". At this point the inference is that Starfleet lost to the Borg and the Federation has fallen. Then it switches to Starfleet HQ on Earth, all shiny and military-like, with a meeting between the top brass etc. And aide tells the Admiral they've located the terrorists and the order is given to eliminate them. Switch back to the meeting in the bar, and an alert siren wails. One of the officers looks up pale faced and anounces the Enterprise has entered the system. Everyone shits themselves... The basic premise is after beating back the Borg elements in Starfleet try to impose martial law, and a civil war breaks out. Those wanting to keep the Federation as it was lose and it becoems a guerilla war. The Enterprise-F is an object of terror (basically akin to Darth Vader's super star destroyer in Star wars). The rebel Starfleet officers operate in small groups, so it would be small focused crew. The Klingon Empire would have been conquered, and the Klingon/Starfleet rebels would be operating on the fringes of the Federation. The tone would be dark humour rather than the usual ernest seriousness. That would be how I would do it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Karl Urban is playing Dr. McCoy? WTF did that come from? "I'm a doctor, not a Rohirrim!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Warpechowski Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I'm not a trek fan, but isn't this a marvelous opportunity to move the setting away from the "idealistic" end of the Sliding Scale Of Idealism Versus Realism and more towards the "realistic" (=darker) end? Maybe not, though. In my opinion, the best feature of Star Trek is its idealistic view on the future of mankind. No one has done it better. Most of the times its quite lame, but fortunaly the darker side of the future has been show in other series. Im not a big fan of Star Trek, but I respect it for what it is. The enemy is always out there, not within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 In my opinion, the best feature of Star Trek is its idealistic view on the future of mankind. No one has done it better. Most of the times its quite lame, but fortunaly the darker side of the future has been show in other series. Im not a big fan of Star Trek, but I respect it for what it is. The enemy is always out there, not within. I liked DS9 for that too. Darker, but still hopeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potsherds Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I liked DS9 for that too. Darker, but still hopeful. Yeah. That's the nice part of the entire franchise. It's upbeat, for the most part (and way waaaaay into the realm of fantasy, as a result). SPOILER: Trek movieI wonder if this movie will create an alternate 'verse where things are more gritty, dirty, dark, and realistic? Maybe they're hoping to entice RDM back to writing for them. (Yeah, right.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneeye Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I hope the series is revitalized through this movie. I'm wondering how they can make starfleet academy interesting, hogwarts maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derfel Cadarn Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I hope the series is revitalized through this movie. I'm wondering how they can make starfleet academy interesting, hogwarts maybe? I don't think Starfleet academy comes into it. There were rumours but they seem to have been denied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't think Starfleet academy comes into it. There were rumours but they seem to have been denied The problem with doing an Academy picture and having all of the same people we know and love is the age differences. Scotty and Bones are a number of years older than Kirk, and Spock has at least a handful of years ahead of him when it comes to Academy time. Chekov joined the Enterprise out of the Academy in season 2 and Sulu was a member of Captain Pike's Enterprise. It is impossible to have them all in the Acacemy at the same time without re-writing pretty much all of Trek history... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Sucks balls. The movie has been delayed until 8 May 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potsherds Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Sucks balls. The movie has been delayed until 8 May 2009. Eh. That's fine with me, honestly. I guess I'm not really excited about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narishma Reborn Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Sucks balls. The movie has been delayed until 8 May 2009. I've been hyped for this movie since it was announced. A restart for the franchise? Sounded great. Now another 6 months added to the wait. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted May 2, 2008 Author Share Posted May 2, 2008 JJ Abrahms talks about gaining wider appeal for his new Star Trek film. "The whole point was to try to make this movie for fans of movies, not fans of 'Star Trek,' necessarily,'" Abrams said. "If you're a fan, we've got one of the writers who's a devout Trekker, so we were able to make sure we were serving the people who are completely enamored with 'Star Trek.' But we are not making the movie for that contingent alone. That sound you hear in the background is Trekkers around the world putting on their rubber ears and Klingon forheads, charging up their home-made phasers and sharpening their Bat'leths. They will be marching on Mr. Abrahms home in no time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 JJ Abrahms talks about gaining wider appeal for his new Star Trek film. That sound you hear in the background is Trekkers around the world putting on their rubber ears and Klingon forheads, charging up their home-made phasers and sharpening their Bat'leths. They will be marching on Mr. Abrahms home in no time... First of all: Trekkers are insane. We Trekkies are more open minded. Second: I don't know that it's that bad of a thing. If he pulls it off. Trekkies know that a new infusion of blood is needed to cintinue and expand on a great sci-fi universe. In some ways, it's not unlike the recent re-invention of the Bond franchise. He's got a bit of lee-way from this Trekkie, but I still have very high expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.