| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
Which is not a good sign. Now that you mention it, these "Klingons" look more like the deformed humans in Beyond.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 18201
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
and they actually explained in Season 4 of Enterprise how Klingons ended up looking the way they did in TOS.
Old Trek fans like us either have to embrace the new vision of Star Trek or we move on.
_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| numero-ocho wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
and they actually explained in Season 4 of Enterprise how Klingons ended up looking the way they did in TOS.
Old Trek fans like us either have to embrace the new vision of Star Trek or we move on. |
Yes, but are these guys following canon or they just chucking it out the door like the JJ Abrams movies and creating a new vision? I'm guessing its the latter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
and they actually explained in Season 4 of Enterprise how Klingons ended up looking the way they did in TOS.
Old Trek fans like us either have to embrace the new vision of Star Trek or we move on. |
Yes, but are these guys following canon or they just chucking it out the door like the JJ Abrams movies and creating a new vision? I'm guessing its the latter. |
Seeing as Kurtzman is involved and he/Abrams pretty much took a dump on canon wherever they go (Trek, Wars, etc), I would agree.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 18201
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
and they actually explained in Season 4 of Enterprise how Klingons ended up looking the way they did in TOS.
Old Trek fans like us either have to embrace the new vision of Star Trek or we move on. |
Yes, but are these guys following canon or they just chucking it out the door like the JJ Abrams movies and creating a new vision? I'm guessing its the latter. |
Seeing as Kurtzman is involved and he/Abrams pretty much took a dump on canon wherever they go (Trek, Wars, etc), I would agree. |
That's what doesn't make sense. If the creators don't want to be constrained by canon then make a sequel to the Next Gen/DS9/Voyager series instead of a prequel. Rather than alienating a large portion of the Trek fan base by rewriting stories we've loved, write something new and old Trek fans can try and embrace. I suspect writers, Paramount and CBS execs aren't willing to take that kind of risk though.
_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| numero-ocho wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Also, the continued weird appearance of the Klingons as compared to earlier shows and movies continues to wig me out. |
The Klingons in this series resemble more like the ones in the JJ Abrams movies.
I think most of the Trekkies are used to the Klingons that were on TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, which were not that far off from their appearance in TOS. |
and they actually explained in Season 4 of Enterprise how Klingons ended up looking the way they did in TOS.
Old Trek fans like us either have to embrace the new vision of Star Trek or we move on. |
Yes, but are these guys following canon or they just chucking it out the door like the JJ Abrams movies and creating a new vision? I'm guessing its the latter. |
Seeing as Kurtzman is involved and he/Abrams pretty much took a dump on canon wherever they go (Trek, Wars, etc), I would agree. |
That's what doesn't make sense. If the creators don't want to be constrained by canon then make a sequel to the Next Gen/DS9/Voyager series instead of a prequel. Rather than alienating a large portion of the Trek fan base by rewriting stories we've loved, write something new and old Trek fans can try and embrace. I suspect writers, Paramount and CBS execs aren't willing to take that kind of risk though. |
That would still be constrained by canon albeit lesser so but then they would have to continually put in references to the past to appease the fanbase. Not to mention, they've already listed a good chunk of the future in those time travel episodes of TNG/DS9/Voyager/Enterprise.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
I think JJ Abrams basically saw TOS as his inspiration, and disregarded all the Star Trek series after that. TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. Thats pretty much why he went with the alternate story line to create a new universe separate from the previous Star Trek series. Also I wouldn't be surprised if Hollywood treated Star Trek as a franchise to be continually rebooted like Spiderman, Batman, etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
I fell asleep 15 minutes in and woke up 10 minutes before the ending. Went home and read the wiki. Felt satisfied enough since i got my nap. Possibly the worst star trek Movie I've seen since Generations.
I actually like Discovery's first two episodes A LOT. The modernization of TV shows help a lot. Even as a fan of those old Star Trek shows were they were corny as hell and I say that as a HUGE fan of Voyager and TNG. Bad acting and writing were synonymous with star trek but this iteration seems to have fixed that. Thank God. I don't think I could stand listening to Marina Sirtis exaggerate groans for 15 seconds at a time today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
Bull. It grossed $159M domestically and $343M worldwide. Even if it lost money (which requires you to believe Hollywood accounting), that is light years from a bomb. Yeah, it was such a bomb that they've already announced the release date for the next installment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K2
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 23529
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
Bull. It grossed $159M domestically and $343M worldwide. Even if it lost money (which requires you to believe Hollywood accounting), that is light years from a bomb. Yeah, it was such a bomb that they've already announced the release date for the next installment. |
They make Jack Reacher sequels, both of which are domestic bombs. As K2 pointed out, both figures are woefully well under the previous films, which highly suggests people are not interested in Fast and the Furious in Space anymore. And that even with the boost of IMAX and the Anton Yelchin/Leonard Nimoy tributes.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
Bull. It grossed $159M domestically and $343M worldwide. Even if it lost money (which requires you to believe Hollywood accounting), that is light years from a bomb. Yeah, it was such a bomb that they've already announced the release date for the next installment. |
They make Jack Reacher sequels, both of which are domestic bombs. As K2 pointed out, both figures are woefully well under the previous films, which highly suggests people are not interested in Fast and the Furious in Space anymore. And that even with the boost of IMAX and the Anton Yelchin/Leonard Nimoy tributes. |
If Discovery does well which I think it will it'll create hype for another movie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nickuku wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
Bull. It grossed $159M domestically and $343M worldwide. Even if it lost money (which requires you to believe Hollywood accounting), that is light years from a bomb. Yeah, it was such a bomb that they've already announced the release date for the next installment. |
They make Jack Reacher sequels, both of which are domestic bombs. As K2 pointed out, both figures are woefully well under the previous films, which highly suggests people are not interested in Fast and the Furious in Space anymore. And that even with the boost of IMAX and the Anton Yelchin/Leonard Nimoy tributes. |
If Discovery does well which I think it will it'll create hype for another movie. |
There will still be movies, I don't doubt that. But the bland, let's see how many times we can put Chris Pine on a motorcycle in space, Abrams timeline is just about running its course.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | nickuku wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | rwongega wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Canon is overrated. Most viewers -- including most Trekkies -- just want to be entertained. The reboot movies with Chris Pine have done well, both at the box office and with audiences. I liked them.
Having said that, I confess to being an old time Trekkie, so I do understand where you're coming from. However, if you're really so rigid that you can't deal with it, it's time to move on. It would be virtually impossible to create new Star Trek content that would satisfy you and that would appeal to a broader audience of people who could care less about canon. |
The last Trek movie bombed and lost 50.5 mil. http://deadline.com/2017/07/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-box-office-forecast-sumer-franchise-fatigue-1202123662/ |
Bull. It grossed $159M domestically and $343M worldwide. Even if it lost money (which requires you to believe Hollywood accounting), that is light years from a bomb. Yeah, it was such a bomb that they've already announced the release date for the next installment. |
They make Jack Reacher sequels, both of which are domestic bombs. As K2 pointed out, both figures are woefully well under the previous films, which highly suggests people are not interested in Fast and the Furious in Space anymore. And that even with the boost of IMAX and the Anton Yelchin/Leonard Nimoy tributes. |
If Discovery does well which I think it will it'll create hype for another movie. |
There will still be movies, I don't doubt that. But the bland, let's see how many times we can put Chris Pine on a motorcycle in space, Abrams timeline is just about running its course. |
Definitely not a fan of the reboots. I think ST needs to go forward in the timeline. We need to know what happens beyond voyager and not have to play the games to find out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Face it the 2nd movie even though it made money was a disappointment story wise, which pretty much turned people off to the 3rd movie. Also Abrams went to work on the Star Wars reboot which left the 3rd Star Trek movie like it was an afterthought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | Face it the 2nd movie even though it made money was a disappointment story wise, which pretty much turned people off to the 3rd movie. Also Abrams went to work on the Star Wars reboot which left the 3rd Star Trek movie like it was an afterthought. |
Didn't Justin Lin direct star trek 3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29279
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is this the thread where all the virgins meet up and talk about not getting any?
(High fives high school jock at lunch table).
 Sorry I just wanted to play a 80s/90s high school bully for a second. Jokes aside I think I'm gonna check this show out. It's gotten good reviews.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38775
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nickuku wrote: | | lakersken80 wrote: | | Face it the 2nd movie even though it made money was a disappointment story wise, which pretty much turned people off to the 3rd movie. Also Abrams went to work on the Star Wars reboot which left the 3rd Star Trek movie like it was an afterthought. |
Didn't Justin Lin direct star trek 3 |
Yep, he basically had to work within the confines of the JJ Abrams vision set in the 1st and 2nd movies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kikanga wrote: | Is this the thread where all the virgins meet up and talk about not getting any?
(High fives high school jock at lunch table).
Sorry I just wanted to play a 80s/90s high school bully for a second. Jokes aside I think I'm gonna check this show out. It's gotten good reviews. |
Yes I meet up with my other 30 year old virgin friends on friday and saturday night where we watch old star trek series on netflix and giggle about our crushes on Marina Sirtis and Gates Mcfadden. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps. I'm responding to the claim that it was a bomb. $343M worldwide is not a bomb. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | Face it the 2nd movie even though it made money was a disappointment story wise, which pretty much turned people off to the 3rd movie. Also Abrams went to work on the Star Wars reboot which left the 3rd Star Trek movie like it was an afterthought. |
They aren't making movies for hardcore Trekkies. Rotten Tomatoes shows an audience score of 90% for the second movie. The average rating was 4.2/5 from 311,763 people. IMDB shows a 7.8 average from 423,669 people. Maybe you didn't like it, and maybe many hardcore Trekkies didn't like it. The general movie-going public loved it.
If you want to believe that this is all bombing and that everyone hates it, okay, I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
