Star Trek 11 anyone actually waiting???

[Krael]

Star Trek 11 anyone actually waiting???
I don't think star trek 11 is going to be a great movie.

I'm sure that paramount will kill TOS with this movie, because how in the world will you make a movie about a sci-fi series that ran in the 60s with the same feeling.

The actors that played in TOS have played the characters so long that they have become icons for the characters for them. I'm sure they will find great actors, but they won't have characteristics the old actors had.

Also the equipment they'll be using will probaply be modernized which would seem very odd if you compare them with the original equipment. For example the last star trek serie enterprise which was pre-TOS had sometimes even thinner equipment than Kirk had. This annoyed me.

But enough complaining from my side what do you guys think?

 

[Majestic]

I believe it will be the worse movie ever, the original TMP I believe will be better. But I am still going to go watch it and hope I am wrong. I just think recasting TOS actors is a really bad move.

 

[Cylon]

I dout it will be very good but i suppose i will watch it anyway

 

[Creed]

i have the impression it is going to be a farce....
much liek the recent rip offs of older shows.

Lots of 'in jokes' and very little content, mixed in with some shock factor and anything else they can do to grab some headlines...

(expect Ohura to be a bad girl and Kirk to have even less class than he did in TOS)

{he didn't need a great deal then, it was the seventies, but we have higher standards these days)

Post edited do to adult content. Let me remind you this is a FAMILY oriented site. That means there are young adults and kids here on the site. - Syf

 

[F-Bobby]

im waiting for someone to come to their senses and scrap the whole project.

 

[Rodglas]

Lets not be too hasty here.

Kirk, Spock, Mckoy and the rest are characters, fictional beings, who can in that sense be occupied by any actor.

We accept this as truth for so many other roles, in plays like Hamlet, Macbeth, The Death of a Salesman and so many others.

We accept this as truth with movies, the Bond films for example.

Why not Star Trek? That is the question the people behind ST: New Voyages asked and seems to work for them, why not then the actual Studio that has the legal rights to produce Star Trek.

I love Shatner, Nemoy and Kelley as much as anyone but there time in the roles has passed. There is no reason to assume that Kirk and the bunch stopped having adventures because the iconic actors who played them are too old or frankly too dead.

I not saying this movie will be good, I will not say that it must be bad. I will only say that I will go see this film and judge it on its own merits as a Star Trek movie (many of which were not great movies even with the original actors) and let the actors prove to me that they can be the characters we all love.

Does it really matter if the tech doesn't completely jive with the look of the original (something I'm very sure they would try to avoid as much as possible) as long as it looks good and they actually produce a compelling story? Do they have to be bound completly to the 1960's view of the future? Is not a movie about the story and the characters?

I look forward to this movie with cautious anticipation, as I do with most trek films.

Rod

 

[F-Bobby]

I'm more worried about them distorting the timeline just like the did with Enterprise. Just pretty much taking all the history thats already been laid down over the past 40 years and saying the hell with it just so they can make some money.

 

[Krael]

I'm concerned about what they will do with the timeline too (forgot too mention that one). Probabply they'll try too "fix" the timeline they wrecked with enterprise.

At Rodglass: What I like about the people who do ST: New Voyages they are actually really fans and though they don't do the characters as good as the original cast at least they try too be as genuine as possible. What I have seen with movies who get new casts the actors aren't trying to be the same character as the previous cast. I'm not saying that they don't want that, but the new directors often choose for that.

I'm afraid that they'll ruin TOS with the things Creed said:

Edited by Syf!!!

 

[Muad'Dib]

I'm not really sure, it depends on one major thing. As I originally understood, this new movie was going in fact to be a complete reboot of the entire franchise...meaning there was no TOS, no TMP, no nothing...it is brand spankin' new from the get go.

If that is the case, then I think there is some hope that I will enjoy the film. Without having to worry about anything like original stories and timelines, a fresh rewrite of Trek might be a good thing.

Let's be honest TOS might be endearing but it wasn't all that good really. TMP was better simply because of 2 things: Wrath of Khan and to a thinner degree Undiscovered Country.

I don't have problems with neither the cast selected nor JJ; if they use TMP style ships, tech, uniforms and approach this movie as if it were a brand new story completely and follow the pattern with any potential subsequent direct sequels, then I say terrific let's see what they can do with it.

The only thing that worries me is that Leonard Nimoy has been cast. It worries me because unless he was just cast for nostalgia value and he is a different character, if he is Spock remembering some sort of "lost tale" where they all met before they met in canon TOS, then yes it will absolutely undoubtedly suck...hard.

Here's hoping the original rumors were true and they just started Trek all over with a blank slate; no crappy Enterprise, no shirt uniforms, no self righteous captains moaning about the Prime Directive then bending it when it suits their purpose, no continuity gaps, no omnipotent Qs flying around, no T-1000s trying to take over the universe with their genetically engineered lizard armies hooked on crack, no Worf saying it's a good day to die every twenty seconds and never dying.

If that's the case, I very much look forward to seeing it; otherwise...no thank you, bring on Avatar.

 

[Lord_Trekie]

I'll be very very wary of what I do regarding STXI, I likely won't go see it in theaters, I probably won't even buy it (I only own ST VI, VIII and X) and I doubt I will even rent it myself when it comes out on video/dvd. Nothing fits, you can't do a 60's show in the 21st century and expect it to come out right, it's just impossible...

 

[Syf]

General Administrative warning

Ok people, Let's remember that this is a child friendly site. If I have to edit one more post on this thread do to adult language, I will not only reprimand the one that posted it (or quoted it!), but I will lock the thread.

 

[CrazyFrog1903]

I will wait to see the movie before I pass judgement on it.

You have to remember something about the timeline. You havt to look at it in the order the movies/series came out. Not the dates of the shows. Enterprise came out AFTER all the other series changed history many times and First contact threw the Borg into the past. The temporal cold war in Enterprise was a direct result of Voyager helping prevent the destruction of everything in the 26th century. I know this is confusing if you look at it from a stand point of the dates the shows are suppose to take place in. You must look at it from the order the shows came out and how each show affected the star trek universe as a whole.

It is entirely possible that the new movie would show the universe after all the changes in the timeline. Thus, it would actually be an alternate reality then the TOS we all know and love. I want to see what they can do with it before I make my judgement on the movie.

The problem with all of it is if you miss one series or movie that you don't get the complete story of what star trek has become.

I agree with Syf. Lets keep this a family friendly chat about it.

 

[EAS_Intrepid]

Nothing fits, you can't do a 60's show in the 21st century and expect it to come out right, it's just impossible...

If we leave NewBSG out, but that is probably a matter of taste

I do not look forward to this. Aside from that, I am indeed curious how Bruce Greenwood fits into this!

I mean: HE played JOHN F. KENNEDY in "Thirteen Days"!

 

[Syf]

I myself am looking forward to this. I do hope it means a full "reboot" of Star Trek. I do hope it revives the franchise.

When I see people say "you can't change that", it seems to remind me of the early to late 20th century when people fight against making all people equal in the USA. I can only say this... the only constant in the universe is change... get used to it.

 

[Muad'Dib]

I recently read in the rumor mill that the proposed theme of the film wouldm involve the Romulans using the Guardian of Forever to go back in time and kill young Kirk. Old Spock then travels back to warn young Spock and more than likely changing the timeline by having them all somehow meet before they met in TOS, weird considering some characters weren't old enough to even be in the Academy together. I suspect that even if they alter the timeline, they might do some stupid crap that reverts everything at the end as if the movie's events never happened.

Still, if this is true then it is exactly what I did NOT want to see. I don't mind at all rewriting history in a reboot where nothing has been written and everything starts again with a clean slate. But if they are going to use the same stupid Enterprise gimmicks with the new cgi TOS Constitutions and red shirts then I definately do not want to see this. Oh God I hope this was only a fake leak in order to keep the real plot under wraps but if X-Men 3 taught me anything is that as soon as those lame fake scripts and plot details begin to appear they are more often than not true. Very depressing.

 

[Insidious_Tool]

I recently read in the rumor mill that the proposed theme of the film wouldm involve the Romulans using the Guardian of Forever to go back in time and kill young Kirk. Old Spock then travels back to warn young Spock and more than likely changing the timeline by having them all somehow meet before they met in TOS

I think that storyline does have merit and can be canon in my opinion. Their are many gaps that can be filled
example 'Christopher Pike's terrible injury occured in such an incident aboard a training vessel. The exposure left him crippled and confined to a wheelchair in the mid-2260s. (TOS: "The Menagerie, Part I")' from memory alpha.

The missing details in that hole Pike getting terrible injury on a training ship. is just begging for a movie.

Im personally looking foward I have faith that this will be a good film.

 

[Elrond]

I think the movie will suck, but I might be wrong (I hope).

If it's a terrible trek movie I may only see it perhaps 3, maybe 5 more times. Well at least the rumors of Matt Damon being Captain Kirk probably won't be true as that whole thing was probably an internet rumor; though if they were, he might actually surprise us and pull off a good act. But I doubt that. At. least. he. might. not. talk. like. every. word. is. its. own. sentence....Spock. And Ben AFLACK won't be Spock as "guestimated" early on in the history of the rumor. Otherwise Star Trek 11 would be another Jay and Silent Bob movie. That'd be pretty jacked up.

I myself am looking forward to this. I do hope it means a full "reboot" of Star Trek. I do hope it revives the franchise.

When I see people say "you can't change that", it seems to remind me of the early to late 20th century when people fight against making all people equal in the USA. I can only say this... the only constant in the universe is change... get used to it.

Yeah, even the constant of light speed could still be open to debate. It could actually change over time or so I've heard. Short story shorter, constants are not constant except for change.

 

[Syf]

Exactly. It's unfortunate that science has not invented an Immortal drug that allows actors like the original TOS cast live forever so they can make more and more new movies, etc. But the truth is simple, the only way to attract a new young crowd of fans is to appeal to the newer generations. That means a concept as good as Star Trek will always be reinvented. So to all the TOS fans, I weep for you if you can not get past the idea that half the original cast are gone. If people are truly fans, they will encourage and embrace the new faces in Trek. Just like in our wonderful sports world, new and old players come and go, but the games are what we love none the less. Why can't we except this is the fait of Star Trek. Would you (the original TOS fan) rather they bury Trek along with the actors? I myself can not except that. "The show must go on"... and we fans will embrace the new actors because we can "boldly go where no man has gone before".

Those that don't want to except this, here's what you do... Give up on ever seeing anything but reruns from 1966. They are not going to make a new Star Trek film or series with Bones or Scotty ever again... at least not the original ones.

Sorry, but this really saddens me to see people that claim to love Trek talk so negatively toward the concept that there is going to be a new Trek film without the original cast or casts from previous series or movies. What happened to embracing the new? This reminds me of back when TNG first aired. People at the conventions were all in an uproar because Shatner wasn't going to be part of it... Deja Vu anyone?

Sorry everyone, I'm not flaming no one here nor attempting to be mean. I am just sick of hearing the complaints that it's not the old cast. What's the point? So I am being the voice of reason here is all.

I myself plan to be standing in line waiting for the movie when the local theater opens it's doors on opening day of this new film. Hopefully they will have limited edition posters or something for the first people to buy a ticket.

There... you wanted a debate... you've got one!

 

[Muad'Dib]

Well Syf I more than agree with your stance, in fact I don't mind the new casting at all and pretty much find just about everyone satisfactory if not also a good choice and likeable.

However my potential disdain isn't with replacing the cast...far from it; what I have been liking less and less by the second is the information that hints that this is in fact not a reboot as originally reported but somehow a new story of events that occured fitted within the already established canon timeline.

It's not so much that I care how they may attempt to fit it into the canon or whether it will work out well or not, basically it's that I'm kind of tired of the rewriting of history and not to mention the excessively overused and extremely lame gimmick of time travel yet again. I don't want another Enterprise (Series) with the TOS cast and I don't want to see those horrible 60s designs in modern day cgi like on DS9 and Ent, and I certainly don't want yet another boring story of former Trek villains going through time to kill Kirk while young and having future Spock going back like Kyle Reese in the Terminator.

I want a completely blank slate. Yeah give me Captain Kirk, yeah give me the U.S.S. Enterprise and the same general concepts and characters; but start again from scratch. Think of it in comic book terms as Star Trek: Infinities or this film as Ultimate Star Trek while the original canon was 616.

I have no doubt the film will be good, I trust JJ Abrams and like I said I find the casting pretty good. But if they are keen on really breathing brand new life into Trek then really go for it and reinvent it as originally posted, don't just give a half developed over used excuse of time travel and say yeah that explains how it's possible because after five series and several movies of the same gimmick, it's tired.

My two cents...

 

[Syf]

I agree with where your going there. I don't want another mistake kind of movie. I will personally hold my crits until after the movie is over and I walk out of the theater. I think JJ will do fine. *crossing fingers*

 

[Jaing Skirata]

I don't know about it being crap. I mean, even if my favorite Star Trek movie IS Nemesis... And the doctor from SG Atlantis is a pretty good actor....

 

[Krael]

It has become quite a tie (well ok the people wanting to see it won).
Anyways if it comes out I'll probaply going to see it too.
I just hope this movie resembles more of the ideas Roddenberry had.

 

[Elrond]

One thing I'm not pre-criticizing is the original/new crew idea, it's the fact that they're going back in the past and re-doing Kirk, Spock, and the rest of them. Some of the original crew are gone. Star Trek needs to move forward, not backwards - I was excited as ever when Voyager first aired in 1995, because Trek then was moving forward. Voyager was a whole new crew, and I didn't mind it then. I don't mind a new crew. But going backwards instead of forwards just doesn't seem as interesting to me as going ahead further into the future. One of the reasons I think they don't want to do a movie on the distant future is because we don't even know enough about what things are going to be a year from now let alone 400 years from now! But that said, we did have TNG which is a century after TOS, and DS9 started along with it, and Voyager came later.

Now I might not like the idea of going backwards as much as going forward, but I'm not saying it's going to be a bad movie. I'm just tired of it being Enterprise everytime for one thing. Change is needed. We need something new - brand new. Perhaps one set in 2400 where the Captain of the new Federation starship *insert name here* is actually a Romulan, but they're allies of the Federation now.

Voyager is presumably in a Starfleet museum by Nemesis, so the Voyager crew may not return again, with all of them taking positions in different areas, so can't do a ST: 12 on that. But of course, Tolkien's book The Hobbit is going to be turned into a movie (actually 2 of them in fact) and that takes place before The Lord of the Rings. In the same way, sometimes to move forward, instead of looking forward to something you have to look...backward...to it.

I hope they work something really good into the plot for ST: 11. Indeed, I really can't wait to find out what's in store for young Kirk (obviously he won't die, nor will any of the other original crew so it's not going to be suspenseful in that way).

 

[Aerilon]

Why haven't I posted on this thread yet I ask myself...

Ok, Star Trek 11. I'd by lying if I said that I wasn't looking forward to it, as it is Trek, but personally, I think Star Trek is slowly dying out. Trek.com is shutting down, there hasn't been a series in quite some time, nor any mention of one, the last one didn't work out, and now they're making a movie, that many fans think is wrong, because, alike Enterprise, they're going backwards in time, instead of forwards.

I didn't actually think Enterprise was that bad. Granted, it was full of inconsistancies, but it was another Trek show, and it was more or less explaning what happened before the Federation, which I thought was good. With enough support, and a few less moaners, Enterprise could have easily got 7 seasons.

Anyway, as I said, I think Trek is dying. Come 2018, 10 years after the release of this film, I'd be shocked if people were still talking about Star Trek like they are today.

If we look at the past movies, they've been going down hill quite a bit. Ok, First Contact was alright, Insurrection was a bore for most, and Nemesis wasn't done right by a lot of people (including the cast). What does this say?

They are going to mess up this movie, and I think that this movie will give a lot of Trek fans a good reason to complain. It is Time Travel for starters, those episodes and movies really do annoy me, what is real, what has been changed, and what is going to change...

I am lost. I have gone to look for myself, if I get back, before I return, please tell me to wait.

 

[Syf]

Bad News for some!

I don't know if anyone else notice, but because of the Writer's strike, the release date for this next trek film is moved to
May, 2009. :x

 

[Aerilon]

I hadn't noticed that, no, but the writers strike stuff has been sorted now, so everything is on role. However, I am in no rush to watch this movie, so suppose I can wait a little longer for it.

 

[Syf]

Well if the word of the guy behind the Fan Films series Star Trek: New Voyages James Cawley bares any meaning, you should really check out the article about Cawley's visit with J.J. Abrams. I urge anyone even slightly interested to check this out.
Star Trek: Phase II News

In short, Cawley was a skeptic too at first. But not now.

Also note, Star Trek: New Voyages is now called Star Trek: Phase II

 

[Majestic]

Very interesting I at first was a big non-believer in the movie. But after CrazyFrog's and Syf's own comments about the time screw ups in Voyager (saving the 29th century) and the Temporal Cold War in Enterprise I am actually looking forward to this new movie.

A reboot may be exactly what it needs, I just hope they keep the Klingons as enemies in this film like in TOS.

May 2009 you say? What a great 25th Birthday present for me.

 

[Timothyjmcneeley]

That's true. It is possible. Look at the last episode of ENT, where Will Riker is on The Enterprise-D's Holodeck watching.

 

[Syf]

I think J.J would get shot if he pulled that stunt in the movie!