Star Trek
-
21st Century Paul:
Yes, because, in case you don't know it, Star Trek is not about the future.
Wondering what you were thinking?
-
Bruce M.:
Nancy R:
Why were you appalled Bruce? I loved the young Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc.! Simon Pegg as Scotty is the best! (Side note: did you know he played the big fat alien in Star Wars: The Force Awakens who runs the pawn shop and was the owner of the Millennium Falcon when they stole it?) Usually I agree with you on things, but I think you're being a tad over-dramatic!
They didn't reboot Star Trek, they urinated all over it. Nothing about it was remotely faithful to the spirit of the original. The behavior of several characters was absurd, especially Spock. The only redeeming feature was the presence of Leonard Nimoy, who blew everyone else off the screen the short times he was on. This was the only movie I've ever seen that I left genuinely angry that I'd given them some of my money.
Although the new ones are good action movies it feels like Star Trek in name only. Yes, I get it's an alternate timeline but Spock is way too emotional for my tastes. I prefer from TOS to Star Trek Enterprise (including the original cast and TNG films). Last movie was just TWOK rehash, and not a very good one at that.
-
Nancy R:
I thought that was Star Wars which was a galaxy far, far away (but WAY in the past) Star TREK takes place in the future starting in the 23rd century in TOS.
"takes place in the future" but it's not about the future
-
edcrawf:
Bruce M.:
Nancy R:
Why were you appalled Bruce? I loved the young Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc.! Simon Pegg as Scotty is the best! (Side note: did you know he played the big fat alien in Star Wars: The Force Awakens who runs the pawn shop and was the owner of the Millennium Falcon when they stole it?) Usually I agree with you on things, but I think you're being a tad over-dramatic!
They didn't reboot Star Trek, they urinated all over it. Nothing about it was remotely faithful to the spirit of the original. The behavior of several characters was absurd, especially Spock. The only redeeming feature was the presence of Leonard Nimoy, who blew everyone else off the screen the short times he was on. This was the only movie I've ever seen that I left genuinely angry that I'd given them some of my money.
Although the new ones are good action movies it feels like Star Trek in name only. Yes, I get it's an alternate timeline but Spock is way too emotional for my tastes. I prefer from TOS to Star Trek Enterprise (including the original cast and TNG films). Last movie was just TWOK rehash, and not a very good one at that.
just what I say, good action but not Star Trek really, let's see what the new series will be
-
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
I thought that was Star Wars which was a galaxy far, far away (but WAY in the past) Star TREK takes place in the future starting in the 23rd century in TOS.
"takes place in the future" but it's not about the future
Do you have a crystal ball? Nobody knows what is in the future!
-
I've just seen the new Star Trek will be on Netflix...
love2travel:
21st Century Paul:
Yes, because, in case you don't know it, Star Trek is not about the future.
Wondering what you were thinking?
this is a case of you must see it for yourself, it can hardly be explained... I'll say that Star Trek was presented to the NBC as a "space western". Western were in, all about space was in... But Star Trek is anything but a space western if you notice... It's all about setting a far, far away scenario (in time and in space) to disguise they were about the most controversial, deepest, philosophical, etc topics that would have been just censored for such a big company. Still today some movies that want to go "deep" set it all "in a distant future" "another galaxy", so they can get away with it. Actually, to get Star Trek you must get what was happening when it was filmed, quite ironic, lol. The Klingons were inspired in the Russians.... so after 1989 they suddenly became allies... etc In TOS Dvds Roddenberry and others explain all about it. The "first interracial kiss on USA tv" story shows what Star Trek was really all about.
Roddenberry and William Shatner were just decided to do it one way or another... "To boldly go where..." Watch this, Roddenberry sums it all. -
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
-
Nancy R:
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
well this isn't the most active thread here, why writing a long explanation if no-one seems interested? I could write more and I would made myself even much clearer, but the ones really interested will find it for themselves.
-
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
well this isn't the most active thread here, why writing a long explanation if no-one seems interested? I could write more and I would made myself even much clearer, but the ones really interested will find it for themselves.
: Your initial answer was enigmatic at best and most wouldn't have had a clue what to google. An explanation by you was needed, and I'm glad you gave it!
-
Nancy R:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
well this isn't the most active thread here, why writing a long explanation if no-one seems interested? I could write more and I would made myself even much clearer, but the ones really interested will find it for themselves.
: Your initial answer was enigmatic at best and most wouldn't have had a clue what to google. An explanation by you was needed, and I'm glad you gave it!
I'm glad someone was interested. I didn't mean they can google it... Actually half of Star Trek is about the times it was filmed but also half is about inspiring "what humanity could do". So you got Americans, Chinese, Africans and Russians (a Russian Beatle really, lol, yes the Beatles made it to the Enterprise cause Chekov was "inspired" in the Beatles, mostly on Paul I think) on the Enterprise... etc And also the Klingon meaning the Russians too. I don't have a crystal ball but sure if we ever have a first contact they're not gonna look like Spock... or the Star Trek story says World War III happened at the end of 20th century and it didn't happened, etc. They didn't pretend to guess a thing, but to inspire and to talk about those deep topics pretending it's just sci-fi to get away with it. Like if was a escapist, all fantasy thing when it was the most realistic you can watch on mainstream TV. A bit like The Simpson are so realistic cause they're drawings of yellow people with four fingers. Maybe there is a show just like The Simpsons but being filmed with actors, I don't know. Roddenberry said "sex", when do they talk about sex in TOS?, lol, I have missed that.
-
Isn't most science fiction just social commentary about the present?
-
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
well this isn't the most active thread here, why writing a long explanation if no-one seems interested? I could write more and I would made myself even much clearer, but the ones really interested will find it for themselves.
: Your initial answer was enigmatic at best and most wouldn't have had a clue what to google. An explanation by you was needed, and I'm glad you gave it!
I'm glad someone was interested. I didn't mean they can google it... Actually half of Star Trek is about the times it was filmed but also half is about inspiring "what humanity could do". So you got Americans, Chinese, Africans and Russians (a Russian Beatle really, lol, yes the Beatles made it to the Enterprise cause Chekov was "inspired" in the Beatles, mostly on Paul I think) on the Enterprise... etc And also the Klingon meaning the Russians too. I don't have a crystal ball but sure if we ever have a first contact they're not gonna look like Spock... or the Star Trek story says World War III happened at the end of 20th century and it didn't happened, etc. They didn't pretend to guess a thing, but to inspire and to talk about those deep topics pretending it's just sci-fi to get away with it. Like if was a escapist, all fantasy thing when it was the most realistic you can watch on mainstream TV. A bit like The Simpson are so realistic cause they're drawings of yellow people with four fingers. Maybe there is a show just like The Simpsons but being filmed with actors, I don't know. Roddenberry said "sex", when do they talk about sex in TOS?, lol, I have missed that.
Kirk was always banging all the "chicks of the week" and even got one pregnant (Miamanee) But of course she ended up being killed! That episode (and City On The Edge Of Tomorrow where Kirk went back in time, fell in love and had to watch he die so history would not be changed and Hitler win) is my favorite TOS episode.
-
HaileyMcComet:
Isn't most science fiction just social commentary about the present?
yes, at least the best sci-fi is about that... many historical movies are that too. they choose an scenario in the past that is similar to some issue of the present.
-
Nancy R:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
I know all that Oliver, as I've been a fan since Sept. 1966 and have watched all the ST shows, read many many books, and been to many conventions. When you initially said it "wasn't about the future" you confused everyone because you didn't explain or qualify your statement. Now you've made yourself much clearer.
well this isn't the most active thread here, why writing a long explanation if no-one seems interested? I could write more and I would made myself even much clearer, but the ones really interested will find it for themselves.
: Your initial answer was enigmatic at best and most wouldn't have had a clue what to google. An explanation by you was needed, and I'm glad you gave it!
I'm glad someone was interested. I didn't mean they can google it... Actually half of Star Trek is about the times it was filmed but also half is about inspiring "what humanity could do". So you got Americans, Chinese, Africans and Russians (a Russian Beatle really, lol, yes the Beatles made it to the Enterprise cause Chekov was "inspired" in the Beatles, mostly on Paul I think) on the Enterprise... etc And also the Klingon meaning the Russians too. I don't have a crystal ball but sure if we ever have a first contact they're not gonna look like Spock... or the Star Trek story says World War III happened at the end of 20th century and it didn't happened, etc. They didn't pretend to guess a thing, but to inspire and to talk about those deep topics pretending it's just sci-fi to get away with it. Like if was a escapist, all fantasy thing when it was the most realistic you can watch on mainstream TV. A bit like The Simpson are so realistic cause they're drawings of yellow people with four fingers. Maybe there is a show just like The Simpsons but being filmed with actors, I don't know. Roddenberry said "sex", when do they talk about sex in TOS?, lol, I have missed that.
Kirk was always banging all the "chicks of the week" and even got one pregnant (Miamanee) But of course she ended up being killed! That episode (and City On The Edge Of Tomorrow where Kirk went back in time, fell in love and had to watch he die so history would not be changed and Hitler win) is my favorite TOS episode.
But I didn't remember that Kirk "behaviour" with women was different from the main hero of any movie or TV series... well he used to talk with them about the attraction... I don't remind it very well, I though Kirk romances were just "entertainment". Now I have something to focus in the next rewatch.
-
I saw the new Star Trek Beyond movie yesterday in IMAX 3D. It was intense, funny, and exciting. Everything a Star Trek movie should be, and more. They also incorporated Leonard Nimoy's death into the film in a touching way. I found the movie to be very enjoyable!
-
beatlesfanrandy:
I saw the new Star Trek Beyond movie yesterday in IMAX 3D. It was intense, funny, and exciting. Everything a Star Trek movie should be, and more. They also incorporated Leonard Nimoy's death into the film in a touching way. I found the movie to be very enjoyable!
I need to see this in the movie theater!
-
the new series will be called "Discovery", it sounds like original Star Trek spirit. here is the new ship: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5171438/?ref_=fn_al_tt_10 The new movie had very high rating when it was premiered then the rating has fallen. I guess that means that the kind of people that saw it first (the fans!) have liked it more than the average people. So I guess is another Star Trekkish Star Trek movie. Or maybe I'm just too optimistic.
-
I saw the new movie earlier this month and loved it! Looking forward to the TV show in 2017.
-
21st Century Paul:
the new series will be called "Discovery", it sounds like original Star Trek spirit. here is the new ship: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5171438/?ref_=fn_al_tt_10 The new movie had very high rating when it was premiered then the rating has fallen. I guess that means that the kind of people that saw it first (the fans!) have liked it more than the average people. So I guess is another Star Trekkish Star Trek movie. Or maybe I'm just too optimistic.
Remember, the original series got low reviews, too, but here we are today watching reruns for the zillionth time.
-
21st Century Paul:
The new movie had very high rating when it was premiered then the rating has fallen. I guess that means that the kind of people that saw it first (the fans!) have liked it more than the average people. So I guess is another Star Trekkish Star Trek movie.
I can't imagine anyone going to see any Star Trek film who is not a fan! I mean, seriously, why would you go? (unless you had been dragged there by your significant other!)