shakfar
Lt. Commander
[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 582
|
Post by shakfar on Feb 7, 2010 21:40:34 GMT -6
This came from wikipedia "The film has earned considerable critical and financial success, grossing the most of any Star Trek film, even in inflation-adjusted dollars.[20] The film's major cast members have signed on for two sequels.[21] Paramount is planning to release a sequel to the reboot on June 29, 2012.[22][23]"
|
|
edify
Lt. Jr. Grade
Posts: 150
|
Post by edify on Feb 8, 2010 0:36:07 GMT -6
So how is J.J. bent on destroying Star Trek? By casting the same people for the next two sequels?
|
|
Arkroyal
Lt. Commander
I'm a historian, not an engineer![ss:Federation]
Posts: 440
|
Post by Arkroyal on Feb 8, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -6
Please, shakfar, some people *like* this film.
|
|
shakfar
Lt. Commander
[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 582
|
Post by shakfar on Feb 8, 2010 16:44:07 GMT -6
So how is J.J. bent on destroying Star Trek? By casting the same people for the next two sequels? Because the reboot was bad enough and now they are making sequals to the reboot
|
|
edify
Lt. Jr. Grade
Posts: 150
|
Post by edify on Feb 8, 2010 17:30:03 GMT -6
How was the reboot bad? I have news for you, but if they didn't do something drastic with the franchise they likely would never have green-lit another film, considering how poorly Star Trek: Nemesis did at the box office (although I loved the movie). Had J.J. not rebooted the franchise we would have likely said good-bye for good. If you prefer the prime timeline, then fine. Besides a few minor issues, there was nothing wrong with the new film. It was a great movie, and it has served its purpose of bringing many new fans to Star Trek, and believe it or not it was very respectable of established canon. And I know that there have been numerous discussions about that, but not every detail is established from the beginning. Sure the new movie left some things out, but really it might have just dragged the movie on if they made sure and included every minute detail we *ever* learned about the crew. And the minor glitches are easily explainable (not to mention, such as in the case of Spot, every Star Trek show had minor (and some major) glitches). In fact, Gene Roddenberry himself would willingly go against established canon for the sake of telling a good story.
|
|
shakfar
Lt. Commander
[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 582
|
Post by shakfar on Feb 8, 2010 17:48:02 GMT -6
hrm... well you put up a good fight... i gueass i have some re:considaring to do
|
|
Trip
Ensign
]
Posts: 58
|
Post by Trip on Feb 9, 2010 6:47:45 GMT -6
J.J. Abrams didn't really destroy the franchise and it's actually more the opposite when he brought back life to the dying brand.
|
|
Arkroyal
Lt. Commander
I'm a historian, not an engineer![ss:Federation]
Posts: 440
|
Post by Arkroyal on Feb 9, 2010 16:26:47 GMT -6
I'll raise my hand, I scoffed at Star Trek before I saw this film.
|
|
shakfar
Lt. Commander
[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 582
|
Post by shakfar on Feb 9, 2010 16:54:16 GMT -6
how is that even possible?!
|
|
Arkroyal
Lt. Commander
I'm a historian, not an engineer![ss:Federation]
Posts: 440
|
Post by Arkroyal on Feb 10, 2010 8:07:51 GMT -6
I thought it was ultra-geeky, old-fashioned...and I hadn't seen it since I was a very small girl.
|
|
PIKE
Cadet
One beep for YES[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 35
|
Post by PIKE on Feb 22, 2010 13:42:59 GMT -6
Why try and re-write the stories that we fell in love with. Spock sitting on deserted planet Depressed....AW Come ON.
|
|
Dax123
Commander
[ss:NX-01]
Posts: 1,207
|
Post by Dax123 on Feb 23, 2010 15:47:08 GMT -6
I know what you mean captainpike, I did not like the changes in charecters at all but I guess it was inevitable. It's better than no new star trek at all though! We should consider ourselves lucky
|
|
PIKE
Cadet
One beep for YES[ss:Cloak]
Posts: 35
|
Post by PIKE on Feb 24, 2010 13:19:28 GMT -6
Could have written some better way to introduce characters from their Academy days etc or after a few years in Starfleet how they all wind up on Enterprise, there is no way in any Military, no matter what heroic act you performed in battle, you would be promoted from Ensign to Captain, you might get the greatest medal offered (IE- Medal Of Honor), but not jump 5 ranks to Captain.
|
|
Atoz 77
Vice Admiral
[M:0]
[ss:Insurrection]
Posts: 4,065
|
Post by Atoz 77 on Feb 26, 2010 8:54:11 GMT -6
I agree, Pike. Apart from ignoring Kirk's history, that just didn't make a lick of sense to me.
|
|
edify
Lt. Jr. Grade
Posts: 150
|
Post by edify on Feb 27, 2010 19:57:06 GMT -6
Could have written some better way to introduce characters from their Academy days etc or after a few years in Starfleet how they all wind up on Enterprise, there is no way in any Military, no matter what heroic act you performed in battle, you would be promoted from Ensign to Captain, you might get the greatest medal offered (IE- Medal Of Honor), but not jump 5 ranks to Captain. Right, let's argue about realism in a show where transporter technology and time travel is possible. Plus, it's always amusing to me that one reason why so many people disliked the movie is because Kirk jumped from cadet to captain, yet they conveniently forget this is the same franchise in which a teenager saved the Enterprise at least three times when the trained crew couldn't (though, to be fair, the last time he did he was a cadet and a bit older).
|
|