Kevin's Watch

dANdeLION wrote:

dlbpharmd wrote:What we need is a paradigm shift.

I agree. I think that they could learn something from Firefly, like how to avoid a sterile universe. I actually liked the last year of Enterprise, but I think nowadays execs are quick to pull the plug on original ideas, and slow to pull it on overdone ideas.

So true.

dANdeLION wrote: I think nowadays execs are quick to pull the plug on original ideas, and slow to pull it on overdone ideas.

This is why executives should never be trusted to manage ideas. They do not favour the ones most likely to work, but the ones for whose failure they are least likely to be fired.

I obviously don't agree with the notion that Star Trek has run its course and should be allowed to die. Sure I'm a die hard fan but I have limits like anyone else. Most of Voyager bored me and Enterprise was insulting. Why? Because there are no Star Trek universe stories worth telling? Or is it that the continuance of Star Trek has been handled by the wrong sorts of people?
As to the topic, I've been of a mind that Star Trek shouldn't continue to travel away from its point, its roots, but return to them. I think we needed DS9 and Voyager to go off on a tangent so that we might appreciate what we've left behind all that much more. Enterprise should have been a perfect example of what I'm talking about yet the misguided creative team behind Voyager couldn't help but take some of the worst aspects of VOY and plug them into Enterprise. Instead of an exploration of some of the tantalizing histories touched on in STOS we ended up with an alternate universe history that stomped on accepted Star Trek facts whenever possible. Like dAN I enjoyed some of Enterprise's final season but by then it was far too late.
I'm not a big fan of the notion of re telling a story of a young Kirk and Spock but though Paramount has missed the target they seem to me to be shooting at the right tree at least.
I guess what I'm endorsing is a further exploration of the STOS era through the lens of one of its many other starship crews.
I should write a script so you all can see exactly what I have in mind. Alas time is precious at the moment.

aTOMiC wrote:I obviously don't agree with the notion that Star Trek has run its course and should be allowed to die.

I agree, but for a different reason.

Saying that Trek has run its course is basing it on past experience, not on future possibility.

If someone can create a vital, entertaining movie in the Trek-verse, I say great. Should we doubt it can be done? NO WAY.

After all, who could have predicted that something so good as Pirates of the Carribean could arise from so trite a basis as a Disneyworld ride!

The problem lies, really, in the attitude of the owner of the property. Will they dare? Or will they milk?

They'll milk, as they have been doing since TOS went into syndication in 1971. Since then, whatever was good in Trek was done by people desperately kicking against the restrictions imposed by Paramount, which are based on getting the maximum return of cash from the minimum investment of creativity.

There has only ever been one man with the vision and the right to dig Star Trek out of the hole it's gotten into, and that was Gene Roddenberry. The ghouls of Paramount feasted on the carcass of his imagination for over a decade. The meat is long gone, and now they're smashing the bones to get one last lick at the marrow.

Enough is enough. Let's remember Trek for what it was, for what Gene Roddenberry wanted it to be, not for what Rick Berman or the suits at Paramount (or, God help us, John Ordover) tried to make it into. It wasn't meant to last for ever, any more than Roddenberry was meant to live for ever.

R.I.P., the lot of them.

*sigh*


P.S. There is no way Kirk and Spock were at the Academy together. According to The Menagerie, Spock was science officer (though not First Officer) of the Enterprise 13 years before the beginning of TOS, at which time Kirk would have been a strapping youth of about 21. It's possible that their Academy careers could have overlapped, but they certainly would not have been classmates.

But hey, Paramount has defecated on every other scrap of continuity in the Trek canon; why not this one, too?

Good posts VF and everyone. Since all my opinions on this have basically been aired, I'll leave it at that.

--A

Here is a terrifying tid bit.
www2.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=51139

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Where is the suicide emoticon?

--A

Ok. Now picture Matt Damon with Spock ears and you will appreciate the full horror.

Hey, look on the bright side; mebbe Affleck will finally kill the franchise, and mebbe the franchise will take Affleck with it.

Just read that article. Is it still just gossip talk? I do want to stay open-minded about any future Trek movie, but it's hard. Sure, on looks alone, Affleck would make for a dashing young Kirk...but they should just leave Kirk alone.

Matt Damon...well, I actually like him as an actor. Maybe not with Vulcan ears, but I like him. For a change of pace, you could turn Star Trek into a hip action thriller with Damon, along the lines of the Bourne Supremacy. Damon could keep his fancy martial arts/assassin skills and go clean up Starfleet, or whatever...

(Er, I'm just kidding...)

I don't know...

It might be kinda fun to netflix for a really lousy, rainy day. If for no better reason than just to watch the bucket of water that Finnagan (Dennis Leary?) left propped on a half-open door fall on Kirk's head.

Captain Nemo wrote:I don't know...

It might be kinda fun to netflix for a really lousy, rainy day. If for no better reason than just to watch the bucket of water that Finnagan (Dennis Leary?) left propped on a half-open door fall on Kirk's head.

Bwahahahahahhahahah! I hadn't thought of that. I'd pay a decent price to see that at least.

aTOMiC wrote:Ok. Now picture Matt Damon with Spock ears and you will appreciate the full horror.

I think Ben Stiller should be Doc McCoy, and Beyonce should be Lt. Uhura.

I think NOBODY should play Kirk, Spock, etc...

Don't these movie studios ever learn??? Someone probably has the brilliant idea to have Carrot Top play "Young Ensign Kirk" in which he has zany adventures at Starfleet Acadamy drinking Romulan Ale, taking "emoting" classes and partying with some chiffon-wearing green and blue chicks!

Do NOT do this!

Do NOT do this!

Do NOT do this!

I dont know if they have learned or not... however keep in mind that all of this is nothing but speculation and rumor. (except the fact that they are doing a movie and its somehow/sometime in TOS as per the only official poster showing the gold and blue uniform.

There is so much mis-information out there being batted around. Some just from ideas that the producers/writers have been looking at. I dont know that anything concrete that has been said about an actual time... or whether or not kirk and spock will be in it or not.

www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=18614

News that it would adopt the long-mooted concept of Kirk and Spock's youthful adventures at Starfleet Academy provoked a more mixed reaction. Those who thought such a move sacrilege can rest easy though because, as Empire discovered in an interview today with Abrams himself, the story is nothing of the sort.

According to JJ Abrams -
"The whole thing was reported entirely without our cooperation," says the director with a hint of regret. "People learned that I was producing a Star Trek film, that I had an option to direct it, they hear rumours of what the thing was going to be and ran with a story that is not entirely accurate."

But the million dollar question is, what will it be about? Unsurprisingly, Abrams isn't saying ("We've made a pact not to discuss any specifics") but the Lost creator is a confirmed Original Series fan so don't be surprised if his take on the series does indeed take place around the era of Kirk and co

If they're gonna do it, it should be unknowns. Just MHO. Someone you've seen in a hundred films already is going to cloud their portrayals of well-known characters way too much to make us buy in on it. Neither Matt Damon nor Ben Affleck should be considered for ANY role on a Star Trek movie. Way too high profile.

Here is some current news. It was just announced that J.J. Abrams has signed to not only produce, as was orginally planned, but direct Star Trek XI. I expect that would be a good thing but only time will tell. At least its news that suggests that the project is moving along.