243 replies to this topic

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

^^^To be honest, I doesn't really matter when or how we get to hear these things. At some point we are going to know it anyway. Before I went to see Nemesis I pretty much knew what was in it, including the physical appearance of the villain (which kind of makes that "reveal" scene a tad pointless, as was the sacrifice of the great scene where Shinzon lays down the law to what's left of the Romulan hierarchy). The only bit I didn't know about in advance was Data's death, and if I'd been a bit more dilligent then I would have known that too!

New technology mainly gives us the benefit of catching the news faster ~ as you say ~ but its real advantage is in facilitating discussions like these, which to my mind is no bad thing!

[TheHSBR]

I think a good secret can still be kept. Look at the latest release of the Harry Potter book. It wasnt until about a week in advance where reliable info started coming out. The people were basically threatened with severe punishment if anything was traced back to them. Some books were shipped too early and the postmaster personally went to the houses to take them back. I think the movie studios now like to leak info about a movie to create buzz around it. I dont mind it one bit either. I get excited when I hear minor plot points or shooting locations. I dont want the ending but a little stuff here or there never hurt anybody.

[Chalksquared]

I'm not out to start a flamefest either, but it strikes me that the fanbase ~ already divided ~ needs to embrace IDIC and respect the opinions of both sides of this argument as valid, and not dismiss the other side as being either "too easily pleased" or "impossible to please".

If we are going to embrace Vulcan logic, then can't we all agree it is highly illogical to want to boycott a film a year and a half before it is released? FHC is right... we don't know a lot about this movie and already people have it in their heads it is going to be all action, no story, and catered to kids with the attention span of a goldfish.

So what we have new actors playing the parts? It is something that happens. Daimon Boq, the psycho Dax host, the nice female Romulan senator from DS9... characters get new actors! Not a huge deal.

If, in a year or so we know a lot more about this movie and the opinion of some that it will be bad, then I think that's reasonable. But to know so little and already be so against it... wel, that's illogical to me.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

If we are going to embrace Vulcan logic, then can't we all agree it is highly illogical to want to boycott a film a year and a half before it is released? FHC is right... we don't know a lot about this movie and already people have it in their heads it is going to be all action, no story, and catered to kids with the attention span of a goldfish.

Because of Abrams' reputation as a popularist producer and the stated intention to make appeal to the mainstream, a lot of people have expressed concerns that the movie will be ~ for want of a better phrase ~ "Dumbed-down". Nobody that I know of has stated that this categorically will be the case, but they have taken a long, hard look at what blockbuster movies are like and fear the worst for Star Trek. I know of a few people who will refuse to support this movie entirely out of principle because they disagree with returning to the TOS era and recasting the characters and nothing will induce them to do otherwise, therefore they need to know nothing about this movie beyond what they already know and object to. That's OK. That's their perogative.

[FHC]

Well I would rather go to the theater and find out about the movie then, not six months in advance. However the reading of this thread insures that I will be very up to date before I go to see it.

[TheHSBR]

http://www.startrek....oster2/pop.html

there is also a big article on startrek.com from comic con

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

^^^I took a look at that poster and it is every bit as unexciting as the last one they produced a year ago for Trek's 40th anniversary. For crying out loud, where is the originality? Can we extrapolate from both posters that the film is going to look every bit as old-fashioned as TOS does? It's using the same font, and the notion that it's a "teaser" poster is frankly ludicrous because there is no "tease", just a title.

I've got to say that the panel at SDCC did little to persuade me that this entire venture isn't a bit of a mess and in severe trouble. For example, they tell us they have a script finalised, and then there are serial quotes from Shatner that make it clear to the world that he is bemused and, frankly, ignorant about Abrams' plans for him to be in the movie. The two are supposed to have met and had talks, but Abrams is telling the world that he's still trying to find a way for Shatner to be inolved, which means manifestly that his script is in no way finalised.

Forgive me for being a bit cynical here: even if I weren't pretty unexcited by the idea of a return to TOS and a recasting, it is pretty plain to me ~ and I should have thought pretty plain to all of you ~ that Abrams simply doesn't have his hands on the tiller. Despite some preopsterous claims made that Abrams has been given the greatest degree of autonomy ever granted to a Trek producer ~ effectively that he has been handed the franchise to do with as he pleases ~ Paramount seem to be yanking his strings hither and thither. Last year, the 40th anniversary of Trek demanded that there be some news to excite fans that the franchise would continue, but in the absence of anything to report, a "motif" was hastily produced in the form of the first teaser poster of the kind of quality and imagination that a jaded high school student might have produced. The scriptwriters have since admitted that this poster was produced before they had even begun writing the script. Now, call me old-fashioned, but I always thought movies began with a script outline and pre-publicity didn't usually begin until at least the thing had begun shooting! It seems a little like the tail waving the dog, and the whole enterprise seems to be somewhat concept-led, rather than being built around a really solid storyline. Trying to slot something as major as Shatner/Kirk into the mix at relatively the last minute rather suggests to me that ~ inspite of many of us agreeeing that a good storyline is a key element in making a good movie ~ this appears to be thrown together by a committeee to fit around PR moves, and that we may just see a whole pile of CGI action thrown over the bare patches in the hope that no one will notice.

This year, Abrams & co is slated to appear in a panel at SDCC, and something is needed to throw to the fans. Is it me, or is anybody else a tad suspicious about the timing of the rumours that Quinto was about to be signed-up? It seems like he was spirited off to SDCC when the ink was barely dry on his contract! If they hadn't have had at least one of the major roles cast and Quinto only too happy to be on hand to pimp the movie, what else would Abrams have had to talk about to the waiting fans?

The whole thing makes me feel uneasy because it feels very rushed and ameteurish. Things don't seem to be progressing in a logical way with this, and there have been other uncertainties over things that one would have thought would have been fundamental and in place from the outset. Take the debacle about whether Abrams himself would direct ot not. It seems to me that the thing we trekkers ought to be most concerned about is an apparent lack of dedication being shown to this project by Abrams, Orci & co. The fact that Trek was just one of a whole package of Paramount intellectual properties that were handed over for an Abrams makeover is starting to tell. We know that the team have had other projects coming onstream, and it seems that they have been somewhat distracted to date, and yet, still compelled to produce "goods" at various stages at Paramount's behest lest the exisiting fanbase should forget there was ever such a thing as Star Trek.

Ludicrous. Three words: The Emporer's New Clothes.

I hope I'm wrong.

[TheHSBR]

I have a high respect for Leonard Nimoy and I dont think he would attach his name to a project that would sully the name of Spock. I thought it was very clear in the interview that he has a high respect for the script. In addition to that I beleive that the writing team who are lifelong Trek fans want to see this film do well. As for the poster I think its clear that they are trying to connect to TOS. With to 40th being the blue/gold insignia patch and now this one using that same font says that the TOS era is coming back. Scripts also go through many revisions even right up to the release date of the film. When he says the script is finalized I interpret that to mean that the basic plotline and flow to the movie has been established. However they intend to introduce the film such as in a flashback would be where Nimoy/Shatner come in. The problem being that Kirk is technically dead in the current chronology. Just throwing him in might look odd. The problem might even something completely different. I really dont see where things are being thrown together. They are still a year and a half away from release and frankly i think thats its really early to already start casting and having a somewhat finalized script in hand.

[VulcanFanatic]

Jules, maybe i havent been reading up on this movie as much as you have, but i think it is pretty early to be predicting doom on the project. I do have my reservations about recasting the original actors and what TOS movie will actually look like in this modern age of fast paced MTV camera shots, but im not going to let my Katra boil over unless we get more info that i dont like. I have not seen enough info to really know much of anything yet IMO. I actually like the posters, not so much because of their look, but that they are trying to connect with TOS's original look. I remember back when STTMP came out, the first thing i thought about was how i really missed the TOS uniforms and hated the STTMP uniforms for the most part, so im glad that they are not trying to make TOS have too much of a different look.

[FHC]

Forgive me for being a bit cynical here: even if I weren't pretty unexcited by the idea of a return to TOS and a recasting, it is pretty plain to me ~ and I should have thought pretty plain to all of you ~ that Abrams simply doesn't have his hands on the tiller. Despite some preopsterous claims made that Abrams has been given the greatest degree of autonomy ever granted to a Trek producer ~ effectively that he has been handed the franchise to do with as he pleases ~ Paramount seem to be yanking his strings hither and thither. Last year, the 40th anniversary of Trek demanded that there be some news to excite fans that the franchise would continue, but in the absence of anything to report, a "motif" was hastily produced in the form of the first teaser poster of the kind of quality and imagination that a jaded high school student might have produced. The scriptwriters have since admitted that this poster was produced before they had even begun writing the script. Now, call me old-fashioned, but I always thought movies began with a script outline and pre-publicity didn't usually begin until at least the thing had begun shooting! It seems a little like the tail waving the dog, and the whole enterprise seems to be somewhat concept-led, rather than being built around a really solid storyline. Trying to slot something as major as Shatner/Kirk into the mix at relatively the last minute rather suggests to me that ~ inspite of many of us agreeeing that a good storyline is a key element in making a good movie ~ this appears to be thrown together by a committeee to fit around PR moves, and that we may just see a whole pile of CGI action thrown over the bare patches in the hope that no one will notice.

Read Shatner's book on the making of the movies. That is just the way they made STTMP.

It does seem to me to be so funny as this thread is much like ones on religion. Everyone posts and posts trying to change the other posters minds and no one ever changes their minds! LOL

[Chalksquared]

It does seem to me to be so funny as this thread is much like ones on religion. Everyone posts and posts trying to change the other posters minds and no one ever changes their minds! LOL

I am amazed, even at myself, how true this is.

I can't see for the life of me how those who want to hate it so soon think. And, I can see that those who want to hate it seem to think those of us who want to give it a chance are not in our right mind.

This thread will last up until December 25th, 2008 won't it?

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I am amazed, even at myself, how true this is.

I can't see for the life of me how those who want to hate it so soon think. And, I can see that those who want to hate it seem to think those of us who want to give it a chance are not in our right mind.

If you read my earlier post on this subject then you would see that I was cautioning against fans taking such a polarised attitude. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind either way ~ I haven't even made my own mind up yet! However, I am seeing an attitude amongst some fans who seem to be determined to love this movie no matter what because the alternative would be no new Star Trek. Now, I love my Trek, but I'm not so obsessed that I can't live without any new stuff. At this time, I am very bored by the idea of a return to the TOS era and something that's going to look exactly like TOS because I have seen so much of it, and I think it's very hackneyed. I can't see mainstream audiences taking 40 year-old ideas of what "futuristic" seriously, and especially not sexist miniskirts, and the very outdated notions of men and women. I don't think that is so hard to understand since it's not so very far removed form the people who are genuinely keeping an open mind, except that past experience of the way Paramount has been ready to prostitute some of Star Trek's guiding principles to appeal to adolescent boys as though they are the only demographic left on the planet, has led me to be on the side of pessimism rather than optimism.

What I do see is a pile of evidence accumulating that very much does look like the run-up to TMP, and I hardly think that is a great recommendation! TMP is ranked as my worst Trek movie ~ easily ~ and it did show me at the time that TOS did not easily fit into the late 70s milleu and looked clunky besides other sci-fi franchises around at the time. Thank goodness for Nicholas Meyer! I was very, very surprised after the slow crawl through FX that was TMP, that TWOK ever got made, but thankfully the radical redesign and the introduction of some real human conflict worked a treat.

If Abrams manges to produce a movie that is a genuine sequel to TOS, but looks very different from any other Trek and feels different from any other Trek. If it looks bang up to date, but takes major risks in terms of injecting some actual intellectual worth back into the franchise and has great performances, a great storyline, and strong roles for women (not just love interests), them I'll be there. Simple really.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I have a high respect for Leonard Nimoy and I dont think he would attach his name to a project that would sully the name of Spock. I thought it was very clear in the interview that he has a high respect for the script.

To be honest with you, I took Nimoy's comments with a great big pich of salt. I have yet to see any actor who is signed up to begin working on a movie who has dissed the script or any other actor taking part! Just because Trekkers look up to Nimoy as a kind of demi-god doesn't mean to say that he's any different from any other actor once he's signed on the dotted line. He was hardly like to do anything else at a media junket to promote his latest job than praise the choice of Quinto. This is kind of what I mean when I say "Emporer's New Clothes" because people seem to be too willing to put aside judgement in order to see what they want to see. After what happened with Nemesis and Enterprise I am far too much of a natural cynic to believe hype. If you recall every member of the Nemesis cast was pimping the movie to be the highest-grossing Trek ever, and when it tanked, out came the knives for other cast members, the director, the tea lady....just about anyone they could lay the blame on. This has happened with every movie that has ever bombed, and you can bet that if Abrams produces a turkey, then Nimoy will be amongst the first out of the traps to give his reasons as to why the original show he helped to make iconic could not be replicated.

In addition to that I beleive that the writing team who are lifelong Trek fans want to see this film do well.

That may also be a problem: fanboys are bound to have their own rather esoteric take on what they think TOS is and what it should be. Most of us are lifeling fans, but I strongly suspect that if we were given the brief, we would each produce a movie that was vastly different to anybody else's.

.....And they're hardly likely to want to see it do badly are they?

[TheHSBR]

I think Nimoys at the point in his career where he doesnt need to take on any new roles that he doesnt like. Im not too sure I could say the same for the TNG cast. Pretty much they had to find a way to make a successful movie to possibly extend either the series or to springboard them into other acting roles. I just dont see that being the case with Nimoy and if he wanted to do a project it would be because he respected the script and not to get a payday. I could have him pegged completely wrong though....

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

Well, you might be correct about most of the TNG cast, but Patrick Stewart seems to be as happy as a pig in poo being back in England and acting with the Royal Shakespeare Company. He's never out of work and has enjoyed major success with the X-Men franchise as well.

As for Nimoy's motive's too signing up for yet more Trek, who knows....? Shatner rather fascetiously said he needed the money during an interview on Shatnervison!

[FHC]

That may also be a problem: fanboys are bound to have their own rather esoteric take on what they think TOS is and what it should be. Most of us are lifeling fans, but I strongly suspect that if we were given the brief, we would each produce a movie that was vastly different to anybody else's.

.....And they're hardly likely to want to see it do badly are they?

That is not always true. Manny Coto is a self proclaimed fan boy. I think he was doing alright, matter of fact he was doing great, up until they shut the doors on him. For the life of me I can't see why they wont put him in charge of this thing.

[A Chimpanzee & 2 Trainees]

For the life of me I can't see why they wont put him in charge of this thing.

Personally, I think it's because TPTB have always treated the movie franchise very differently than the TV one. The TV franchise feeds the movies, and serves to provide a built in floor for the number of tickets to be sold at a movie. Thus the TV shows exist (ideally) to keep the "fanboys" happy in an effort to keep that floor as high as possible. (A goal which they have recently been failing miserably at.) The goal of the movies is to grab as much money as quickly as possible across the highest grossing segment of the moviegoing demographic - the under 30 crowd, and it always has been. If they were looking into making a new TV show, they would probably look more seriously at Coto, but I suspect that some geniuses up there did some kind of intensive market research and decided that the kind of movie Coto would produce would not attract that demographic in the kinds of numbers that Abrams could. Add to this the fact that the franchise as a whole is on life support, and I think they're hoping that the small amount of cache that Abrams' name brings to the table (with his past success on Lost and perceived success MI:III that many people feel Cruise killed...) will generate interest from all those people who would have said "Manny who?"

[FHC]

More or less what I said back in post # 71

[TheHSBR]

Another article from Comic Con with Orci. He seems interested to hear what Trek fans want in a film
http://trekmovie.com...-fans/#more-876

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

^^^The trouble with that site is that it is overwhelmingly biased in favour of the movie and the "news" is burnished with Pascale's own biased spin. He writes the thing up like and old-fashioned gossip column. Personally I prefer Trekweb.com because the news comes in from multiple contributors and is just posted as it is without any personal spin.

As for Orci wanting fans' opinions, then he could do worse than check out the discussions we've been having over at Trekunited, where the entire concept has been looked at inside out and backwards from every side of the argument. The discussions remain (mostly) polite and there are some very thoughtful people wading in with ideas and suggestions.

The under-30 demographic is an interesting position to take since the Western world has an increasingly aging population and these people have incredible spending power in that they have far greater disposable income than the younger generation, and are only likely to get richer once they've paid off their mortgages and seen their kids through college. It's something that Hollywood hasn't twigged to yet, but this demographic is worth courting for a long-term movie franchise. I'm not making the case for having a cast in zimmer frames or anything like that, but what I am saying is that this generation place a greater emphasis on quality writing, genuinely clever plots, and characters that are multi-dimensional than, and are not adversed to CGI, sex, and death providing it isn't gratuitous and is essential to the story. In the case of Star Trek where a huge number of the most loyal fans are between 30 and 40, trying to compete with films that appeal to youngsters makes no sense at all. It's the older demographic to whom the name Star Trek has any currency and they would do well to concentrate on wooing back the fans who stayed away when Paramount began to pander to the youngsters with Nemesis and Enterprise. I don't buy the idea that the fanbase is shrinking ~ as has been claimed by some ~ it's merely misplaced and tuning into things that appeal more. I still believe there are existing fans who would return in droves if what was on offer appealed to them rather than to the kids and young adults. I think it's no accident that NuBSG has been as successful as it has because it provides intense adult drama which is something that Baird excised from Logan's Nemesis script and was completely absent from Enterprise. If you go back and watch TOS again you will see how squarely it was aimed at adults.

As for Coto, well, he was hailed as the second-coming for Enterprise, but over all his contribution did little to save a failing show, and some of his work furthered the downward slide of the show into sleaze. I wasn't impressed. I'm more of a Behr girl myself.